M/S. Avinash Transpore And Ors. vs. The Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Range-11, Asansol-1, CGST Division And Ors.
Held
The Court held that the respondent authority concerned should consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated April 10, 2023. This disposal must be in accordance with the law, involving a reasoned and speaking order. Crucially, the authority must provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or their authorized representatives. The Court clarified that it had not examined the merits of the representation itself. The authority is directed to act strictly in accordance with law when considering the representation. The disposal is to be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of the order.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Avinash Transport & Ors., filed a writ petition before the High Court against the Superintendent, CGST & Central Excise, Range-II, Asansol-1 CGST Division, and others. The petitioner had previously made a representation to the respondent authority on April 10, 2023, detailing their grievances. This representation remained pending before the authority at the time of the writ petition's filing. The writ petition sought a resolution of the issues raised in the pending representation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent authority should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending representation dated April 10, 2023, in accordance with law? The petitioner argued that their representation, detailing their grievances, was pending and required adjudication. The revenue authority did not record any specific arguments against this direction. The court was asked to decide if the authority should be mandated to act on the petitioner's pending representation, ensuring a fair process. The core issue revolved around the procedural obligation of the tax authority to address representations filed by taxpayers.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
28 17.11.2023 Ct. no. 2 sb
WPA 23292 of 2023 M/s. Avinash Transport & Ors. -Vs- The Superintendent, CGST & Central Excise, Range-II, Asansol-1 CGST Division & ors. Mr. Somnath Ganguli Mr. Sandip Choraria Ms. Sukalpa Seal ... for the petitioners Mr. K.K. Maity Mr. Tapan Bhanja ...for the CGST authority Mr. Vipul Kundalia Ms. Sanjukta Gupta ….for the Union of India Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. It appears from the record annexed to the writ petition that for the grievance raised in this writ petition, the petitioner has already made a representation before the respondent authority concerned on 10th April, 2023 being Annexure-P/8 to the writ petition and details of the grievance would appear from the said representation which is still pending. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the parties, this writ petition being WPA 23292 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the respondent authority concerned to consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 10th April, 2023
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.