Surajit Banerjee vs. Superintendent Of Central Tax, Range 1, Durgapur1, Division And Ors.
Facts
The petitioner, Surajit Banerjee, filed a writ petition (WPA 478 of 2024) before the High Court challenging an order in original dated March 29, 2022, passed by the Superintendent of Central Tax, Range-1, Durgapur-1, Division. The petitioner's primary contention was that the impugned order was never served upon him. The Court had previously directed the respondent CGST authority to submit documents to counter this allegation. Mr. Dey, representing the CGST authority, submitted documents to demonstrate that the petitioner's claim of non-service was false.
Held
The Court found the petitioner's assertion of non-service of the order in original dated March 29, 2022, to be false, based on the documents submitted by the CGST authority. The Court emphasized that a writ court is a court of equity and requires litigants to approach with clean hands. Since the petitioner's case was predicated solely on the ground of non-service, and this ground was found to be untenable, the writ petition was dismissed. The Court directed that the documents filed by the CGST authority be kept on record. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned, nor were any specific sections of the CGST Act or Rules explicitly discussed beyond the procedural aspect of service of orders.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's claim of non-service of the order in original dated March 29, 2022, is substantiated, thereby warranting relief from this Court? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under GST law). Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that the impugned order was not served, thus violating principles of natural justice and preventing him from availing his remedies. Revenue/State (CGST Authority): Submitted documents to disprove the petitioner's claim of non-service, asserting that the order was duly served.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024 Range-1, Durgapur-1, Division & Ors. Mr. Sumit Ghosh, Mr. Anupam Kr. Dey, Mr. S. Majumdar. … For the Petitioner. Mr. Prabir Bhowmick, Mr. Pradip Paul. …….for the UOI. Mr. Kaushik Dey, Ms. A. Rajyashree. …….for the CGST authority. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. Pursuant to the earlier direction of this Court dated 18th January, 2024, Mr. Dey, learned advocate representing the respondent CGST authority submits the document to show that the allegation of the petitioner made in this writ petition is false with regard to the service of the impugned order in original dated 29th March, 2022. The writ court is a court of equity and every litigant must come with clean hands. Furthermore, the case of the petitioner in this writ petition made out only on the ground of non-service of 2 the order in original which falls in view of the documents submitted by Mr. Dey. Accordingly, this writ petition being WPA 478 of 2024 is dismissed. Let the relevant documents filed by Mr. Dey be kept with the record. (
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.