Sarika Todi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Raja Katra Charge And Ors.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner should be permitted to test the order passed by the proper officer on merits, taking into account the marginal delay in filing the appeal. Recognizing that the appellate tribunal was yet to be constituted, the Court decided to remand the matter back to the appellate authority. This remand is conditional upon the petitioner paying a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the respondents within two weeks from the date of the order. Upon payment of the cost and verification thereof, the appellate authority is directed to hear and dispose of the appeal on its merits, considering the observations made by the High Court. The order passed by the appellate authority on April 1, 2024, is set aside.
Facts
The petitioner, Sarika Todi, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated April 1, 2024, passed by the appellate authority. This order had dismissed the petitioner's appeal filed under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that there was only a marginal delay in filing the appeal, and despite having a strong case on merits, the appeal was dismissed. The petitioner also highlighted that the appellate tribunal had not yet been constituted, compelling them to approach the High Court to have the order on merits tested. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Raja Katra Charge, and others.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to test the order passed by the proper officer on merits, considering the marginal delay in filing the appeal and the non-constitution of the appellate tribunal? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the delay in filing the appeal was marginal and that they had a strong case on merits. They further argued that due to the absence of a constituted appellate tribunal, they were forced to approach the High Court to seek adjudication of the matter on its merits. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment records that the learned Additional Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the respondents. However, the specific arguments or contentions of the revenue are not detailed in the provided text.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
M/L 112 10.09.2024 sb Ct 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 18430 of 2024
Sarika Todi Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Raja Katra Charge & Ors.
Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar
Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee
Mr. Somnath Balial
Ms. Suman Sahani
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Anriban Ray, Ld. GP,
Mr. T. M. Siddiqui
Mr. Tanoy Charkaborty
Mr. D. Sahu
… For the respondents.
The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the order passed by the appellate authority dated 1st April, 2024, by which the petitioner’s appeal under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) has been dismissed.
Mr. Dugar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that there was a marginal delay in filing the appeal notwithstanding the above and despite the petitioner having a strong case on merits
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.