Prosanta Kumar Saha vs. The Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Prosanta Kumar Saha, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated December 14, 2023, passed by the proper officer under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. This order pertained to the tax period from July 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018. The petitioner argued that the order was unsustainable. The respondents, CGST authorities, conceded that the petitioner was not afforded a personal hearing as required by Section 75(4) of the Act, and that the petitioner's response was not considered. The High Court noted these submissions.
Held
The Court held that the order dated December 14, 2023, passed by the proper officer under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, could not be sustained. This was primarily because the respondents conceded that the petitioner was not provided with an opportunity of personal hearing, as required by Section 75(4) of the Act. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner's response had also not been considered. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remanded back to the proper officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law. The proper officer was directed to dispose of the proceedings after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and/or their representative, and after considering the petitioner's response. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated December 14, 2023, passed by the proper officer under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, is sustainable in law, considering the petitioner was not provided with an opportunity of personal hearing as mandated by Section 75(4) of the said Act? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the order was unsustainable. The judgment records that the respondents, representing the CGST authorities, conceded that the petitioner was not provided with an opportunity of personal hearing in tune with Section 75(4) of the Act and that the petitioner's response was not considered. No specific arguments were recorded for the petitioner beyond challenging the order's sustainability.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
AD 1 23.07.2025 sayandeep
Ct.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE With CAN 1 of 2025
Prosanta Kumar Saha Versus Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray
Mr. Subhasis Podder
Ms. Shiwani Shaw
Mr. Gaurav Chakraborty
… For the petitioner
Mr. Kaushik Dey
Mr. Kaustuv K. Maiti
… For CGST authorities.
Challenging the order dated 14th December, 2023 passed by the proper officer under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for the tax period 1st July, 2017 to 31st March, 2018, the instant writ petition has been filed.
Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, since, Mr. Dey, learned advocate representing the respondents on instruction would submit that the petitioner was not provided with an opportunity of personal hearing in tune with the provisions of Section 75(4) of the said Act, I am of the view that the aforesaid order cannot be sustained. There is another aspect of the matter. Records would reveal that the petitioner had also filed a response which was also not considered.
Be that as it may, since the order impugned dated 14th December, 2023 cannot be sustained, the same is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded back to the proper officer for a fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The proper officer shall dispose of the proceedings upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and/or his representative, and upon consideration of the petitioner’s response.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
As a sequel thereto, all consequences will follow.
The connected application being CAN 1 of 2024 having become infructuous and is accordingly disposed of.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, 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.