Kamal Bhattacharjee vs. The State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Kamal Bhattacharjee, filed a writ petition before the High Court at Calcutta. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has been constituted and is functional. Consequently, the petitioner sought the transfer of the instant writ petition to the Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner requested four weeks' time to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT, Kolkata, under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017 / WBGST Act, 2017. It was also prayed that the period during which the writ petition was pending before the High Court be excluded for the purpose of computing the limitation period for filing the appeal.

Held

The Court noted the petitioner's submission that the Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and is functional. Based on this, the Court allowed the petitioner's request to transfer the matter to the Appellate Tribunal for filing an appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017 / WBGST Act, 2017. The Court granted the petitioner four weeks' time to prefer the appeal. Crucially, the Court also directed that the period during which the writ petition was pending before the High Court should be excluded for the purpose of computing the limitation period for filing the appeal. The Court did not decide on the merits of the underlying GST dispute, as the matter was being remitted for appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition should be transferred to the Appellate Tribunal, given its functional status, to enable the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017 / WBGST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the period during which the writ petition was pending before the High Court should be excluded for computing the limitation period for filing the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal? The petitioner argued that since the Appellate Tribunal is now functional, the writ petition should be transferred to it for adjudication as an appeal. The petitioner also sought condonation of delay by excluding the pendency period of the writ petition. The State-respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.