Sri Mukesh Podder, The Proprietor Of M/S Shree Om Sai Metal vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Salkia And Bally Charge And Ors.

Held

The High Court, in its constitutional writ jurisdiction, declined to entertain the writ petition. The Court found that the petitioner had filed the petition after an inordinate delay of over two and a half years without providing any cogent explanation for such delay. Furthermore, the underlying appeal was dismissed for non-compliance with statutory formalities, specifically the non-payment of the required 10% pre-deposit. The Court reasoned that extraordinary writ jurisdiction is not meant to condone such significant delays and failures to comply with statutory prerequisites. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. The principle established is that writ petitions filed with inordinate delay and without justification, especially when challenging orders dismissed for non-compliance with statutory conditions, are liable to be dismissed.

Facts

The petitioner, Sri Mukesh Podder, proprietor of M/s. Shree Om Sai Metal, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the appellate authority under the WB GST Act dated March 2, 2021. The writ petition was filed on August 2, 2023, approximately two and a half years after the appellate order. The appeal before the appellate authority was dismissed due to the petitioner's failure to pay the mandatory pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed amount, which is a prerequisite for filing a statutory appeal. The petitioner did not provide any cogent explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the writ petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should entertain a writ petition filed after an inordinate delay of over two and a half years, without any cogent explanation, challenging an appellate order that was dismissed for non-compliance with statutory pre-deposit requirements? Petitioner's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner. The Court's decision implies the petitioner sought relief despite the delay and non-compliance. Revenue's Contention: The revenue authorities, represented by the State and CGST authorities, likely argued that the writ petition should be dismissed due to the gross delay and the petitioner's failure to adhere to statutory conditions for appeal, rendering the matter stale and the petitioner disentitled to extraordinary relief.