Pdp International PVT LTD vs. Joint Commissioner Of CGST And Cx Kolkata And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
PDP International Private Limited (the appellant) filed an intra-Court appeal against an order dated May 19, 2025, passed by a learned Single Bench in W.P.A. 21594 of 2024. The original writ petition challenged an order-in-original dated April 29, 2024, issued under Section 73(9) of the W.B.G.S.T./C.G.S.T. Act, 2017, for the tax periods 2018-2019 to 2021-2022. The appellant had been permitted to file a response to the show-cause notice, which was considered. The writ petition was filed belatedly, beyond the ordinary limitation period for a statutory appeal. The High Court noted that the grounds raised required adjudication of complex factual issues regarding principles of natural justice.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable as the appellant had a clear statutory remedy of appeal available under the Act. The learned Single Bench's reasoning that the writ petition was filed belatedly and that the grounds urged required adjudication of complex factual positions, making it inappropriate to bypass the appellate remedy, was fully agreed with. The Court found no grounds to interfere with the order of the learned Single Bench. The ratio decidendi is that complex factual disputes and the availability of a statutory appeal remedy ordinarily preclude the High Court from entertaining a writ petition, especially when filed beyond the period of limitation. The appellant was granted liberty to file a statutory appeal within four weeks, with a direction to the appellate authority to entertain it without rejection on grounds of limitation and decide it on merits.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition was maintainable when a statutory appeal remedy was available under the CGST/W.B.G.S.T. Act, 2017, and the writ petition was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. Contentions: Petitioner/Appellant: Argued that the writ petition was necessary due to alleged violations of natural justice and complex factual issues that warranted High Court intervention, seeking to bypass the statutory appeal process. Revenue/Respondents: Contended that the learned Single Bench correctly found that the writ petition was belated and that the complex factual issues necessitated availing the statutory appellate remedy provided under the Act, rather than circumventing it through a writ petition.
Sections Cited
Section 73(9)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Form No. J.(2) Item No.2 Pallab/KS AR(Ct.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE HEARD ON: 02.09.2025 DELIVERED ON: 02.09.2025 CORAM: THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) M.A.T. 925 of 2025 With I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025 PDP International Private Limited Versus Joint Commissioner of CGST & CX, Kolkata North Commissionerate, Kolkata & Ors. Appearance:- Mr. Purnendu Sekhar Bhadra Mr. Sanjoy Bhowmick ……….For the Appellant Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anindya Kanan ………..For the Respondents (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.)
This intra-Court appeal by the writ petitioners is directed against the order dated 19th May, 2025 in W.P.A. 21594 of 2024. The said writ petition was filed by the appellant challenging the order-in-original dated April 29, 2024 passed under Section 73(9) of the W.B.G.S.T./C.G.S.T. Act, 2017 for the tax period 2018-2019 to 2021-2022. 2. The learned Single Bench after considering the factual position, had found that the proper officer has acceded to the request of the appellant and permitted the appellant to file its response to the show-cause notice, which was referred and duly considered by the proper officer. Even after the adjudication order was passed, the petitioner did not immediately challenge the same by filing a 2 2 writ petition and it was filed belatedly and much beyond the period of ordinary limitation prescribed under the Act for filing a statutory appeal.
In any event, the grounds, which have been urged in the writ petition as well as in this appeal requires adjudication into factual position as to whether the officer acted in violation of principles of natural justice or not. The facts, which fall for consideration are complex and complicated and, therefore, the appellant should not by-pass the appellate remedy provided under the Act.
Therefore, we fully agree with the reasoning given by the learned Single Bench and we find no ground to interfere with the order impugned.
Accordingly, appeal fails and stands dismissed alongwith the connected application (I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025).
The appellant is granted liberty to file a statutory appeal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of server copy of this order and if the appeal is filed, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal without rejecting the same on the ground of limitation and proceed to take the decision on merits and in accordance with law.
It will be well-open to the appellant to place all the factual and legal issues before the appellate authority, which shall be considered.
No costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE I agree. (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)
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.