M/S Cart Roadwings Jv And Anr vs. The Additional Comm CGST And Cx And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The appellants, M/s. Cart Roadwings JV and another, filed an intra-court appeal challenging an order dated 5th May, 2025, passed by a learned Single Bench in WPA 3032 of 2025. The original writ petition sought to challenge an adjudication order dated 8th January, 2025, passed under Section 74 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The learned Single Bench had relegated the appellants to avail the appellate remedy, finding the order appealable. The appellants argued that the person in charge of taxation matters was suffering from a terminal illness, but the Court noted that an inspection, panchanama, and statement recordings had occurred, and the matter had been in progress for some time.
Held
The Court held that the learned Single Bench was fully justified in relegating the appellants to avail the appellate remedy. The Court reasoned that since an appealable order had been passed under Section 74 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, the statutory mechanism of appeal should be utilized. The Court noted that the learned Single Bench had sufficiently protected the appellants' interests by directing the Appellate Authority to treat the appeal petition as a first statement of defence, provide an opportunity of hearing, and decide the appeal on merits. The Court emphasized that the powers of the Appellate Authority are co-terminus with the original authority and include re-appreciation of facts, acceptance of documents, and calling for remand reports. Therefore, the appellate remedy was considered wide enough to address all contentions. The appeal was dismissed, but the appellants were directed to file their appeal petition within 15 days of receiving the server copy of the order, after complying with pre-deposit conditions, with the appeal to be entertained without reference to the period of limitation and disposed of on merits.
Key Issues
1. Whether the learned Single Bench was justified in relegating the appellants to avail the appellate remedy instead of deciding the writ petition on merits, given the existence of an appealable order under Section 74 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The appellants contended that the learned Single Bench erred in not entertaining the writ petition directly, possibly due to the critical health condition of their taxation in-charge, implying that pursuing the appellate remedy might be unduly burdensome or delayed. They relied on the fact that the matter had progressed through inspection, panchanama, and statement recording, suggesting that factual issues were already on record. Revenue's Contention: The revenue authorities, represented by the CGST Authority and the Union of India, argued, through their counsel, that the learned Single Bench was fully justified in directing the appellants to pursue the statutory appellate remedy, as an appealable order had been passed. They implicitly supported the view that the appellate authority has wide powers to examine all factual and legal aspects.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2025 Ct. No.1 Item No.10 RP/SM MAT/732/2025 with CAN 1 of 2025 M/S. CART ROADWINGS JV AND ANR. VS THE ADDITIONAL COMM CGST AND CX AND ORS. Mr. Ankit Kanodia, Adv. Ms. Megha Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Tulika Roy, Adv. …. For the Appellants Mr. Uday Shankar Bhattacharya, Adv. Mr. Tapan Bhanja, Adv. …For the CGST Authority Mr. Samir Kr. Datta, Adv. Mr. Jasojit Mukherjee, Adv. …For the U.O.I.
This intra-court appeal has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 5th May, 2025, passed in WPA 3032 of 2025. In the said writ petition the appellants had challenged the adjudication order passed under section 74 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 dated 8th January, 2025. Since the order is an appealable order the learned Single Bench has relegated the appellants to avail the Appellate remedy.
After elaborately hearing Mr. Kanodia, learned advocate for the appellants and Mr. Bhattacharya, learned senior standing counsel assisted by Mr. Bhanja, learned advocate, we are of the view that the learned Single Bench was fully justified in 2 relegating the appellants to avail the Appellate remedy.
It may be true that the person in-charge of the taxation matters of the appellants, which is a joint venture Company was suffering from terminal illness but going by the facts it is seen that there has been an inspection which was conducted, panchanama was recorded, statements have been recorded and the matter has been in progress for quite sometime. Therefore, all factual issues need to be placed before the Appellate authority so that the Appellate authority can examine the matter. The interest of the appellants has been sufficiently protected and safeguarded by the learned Single Bench by observing in paragraph-8 of the impugned order wherein the Appellate authority was directed to treat the appeal petition as a first statement of defence of the petitioners and shall also provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and decide the appeal on merits and in accordance with law subject to the appellants complying with all other statutory formalities. It goes without saying that the powers of the Appellate authority are co-terminus with that of the original authority. The Appellate authority will be entitled to re-appreciate the factual position, accept documents and call for a remand report
3 from the lower authority and take a decision in the matter. The entire adjudicating authority’s file can be called for and examined for the correctness of the decision making process as well as the decision itself. Therefore, the powers of the Appellate authority are wide enough to take note of all contentions that may be advanced by the appellants in the appeal petition.
Therefore, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal along with the connected application is dismissed. However, the appellants are directed to file appeal petition within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order after the pre-deposit condition is complied with. The appeal petition shall be entertained without reference to the period of limitation and appeal be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorised representative of the appellants.
No Costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to all the parties upon compliance of all formalities. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)
4
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.