Nabadwip Internet And Cable Emporioum And Anr. vs. The State Of West Bengal Through The Secretary, Finance Department And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The appellants, Nabadwip Internet and Cable Emporioum & Anr., are challenging an order dated 01.09.2025 passed by Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury. The impugned order directed the exchange of affidavits and required the appellant to deposit 10 per cent of the disputed tax amount, in addition to the sum already deposited under Section 107(6) of the CGST Act, 2017. The appellants are aggrieved by this order and have approached this Bench through MAT 1520 of 2025 and CAN 1 of 2025. The respondents are the State of West Bengal & Ors.
Held
The Bench declined to interfere with the order dated 01.09.2025 passed by Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury. The reasoning was that the said order merely directed the exchange of affidavits and requested the appellant to deposit 10 per cent of the disputed tax amount, over and above the sum already deposited with the Respondent pursuant to Section 107(6) of the Act. The Court found no reason to intervene in this interim arrangement. The ratio decidendi is that interim directions involving deposit of a portion of the disputed tax and exchange of pleadings by a coordinate bench are generally not to be interfered with by a higher bench unless there are compelling reasons. The operative direction was that the State is directed to file the affidavit-in-opposition forthwith. The appeal and the connected application stand disposed of with these observations.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, in its appellate jurisdiction under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017, should interfere with an interim order passed by a coordinate bench that directed the deposit of 10% of the disputed tax amount and the exchange of affidavits. Contentions of the Appellants: The appellants are challenging the order passed by Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury. They are seeking intervention from this Bench against the direction to deposit an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount. Contentions of the Respondents: The respondents, represented by Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty and Mr. Saptak Sanyal, are appearing before the Court. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the respondents regarding the impugned order, other than the direction for them to file an affidavit-in-opposition forthwith.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Section 112, Section 107(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
01 jks
2026 Ct. 759 MAT 1520 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025 Nabadwip Internet and Cable Emporioum & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray Ms. Shiwani Shaw Mr. Animitra Roy Mr. Subhasis Podder … … for the appellants Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty Mr. Saptak Sanyal … … for the respondents Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants impugns the order dated 01.09.2025 passed by His Lordship, Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury. Perused Section 107 and 112 of the CGST Act, 2017. As the Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury, upon hearing the matter, has merely directed to exchange affidavits and requested the appellant to deposit 10 per cent of the disputed tax amount, over and above the sum already deposited with the Respondent pursuant to Section 107(6) of the Act, this Bench declines to interfere. Provided however, Learned Counsel appearing for the State is directed to file the affidavit-in-opposition forthwith.
With the above observations, MAT 1520 of 2025 along with CAN 1 of 2025 stand disposed of. All parties shall act upon the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble Court. (Uday Kumar, J) (Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.) 2
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.