Calcutta Haldia Port Road Company Limited And Anr. vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Held

The Court found that while the explanation for the delay provided by the petitioners was not fully satisfactory, dismissing the appeal on this ground would deprive them of a fact-finding forum. Therefore, the Court decided to grant the petitioners one more opportunity to press their appeal on merits. This was conditioned upon the petitioners paying a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal, within two weeks after the court's reopening post-Christmas Vacation, and submitting proof of payment to the Appellate Authority. Upon compliance, the impugned appellate order dated July 23, 2025, would be treated as set aside, and the Appellate Authority would proceed to hear the appeal on merits. If the petitioners fail to comply with the payment condition, the present order would not benefit them. The Court expressly left undecided the merits of the original appeal.

Facts

The petitioners, Calcutta Haldia Port Road Company Limited & Anr., filed a writ petition challenging an order dated July 23, 2025, passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. This appellate order dismissed their appeal against an order dated June 03, 2024, passed under Section 73 of the said Act, solely on the grounds of delay in filing the appeal. The petitioners contended that the delay was due to a change in management during the relevant period. The Appellate Authority, however, was not satisfied with the reasons provided for the delay.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority was justified in dismissing the petitioners' appeal on the sole ground of delay, thereby denying them an opportunity to argue the merits of their case, considering the explanation provided for the delay. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners argued that the delay in filing the appeal was occasioned by a change in management and that they should be granted an opportunity to present their case on merits. They relied on the principle that a fact-finding forum should not be lost if an opportunity to argue on merits can be provided. Revenue's Argument: The State did not appear to have made any specific arguments on the merits of the delay or the appeal itself, as the judgment focuses on the petitioners' submissions and the Court's own assessment of the situation.