M/S Ray Tele Service vs. The Commissioner Of Central Goods And Servies Tax And Central Excise, And Ors.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent No.4, the Superintendent, CGST, Range-3, Durgapur-II, to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated August 7, 2023. The Court ordered that a decision be taken for lifting the bank attachment in accordance with the law. This decision must be a reasoned and speaking order, and the petitioner or its authorized representative must be given an opportunity of hearing. The respondent No.4 is to pass this order within two weeks from the date of communication of the Court's order. The allegations in the writ petition are deemed denied by the respondents as affidavits were not called for.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Ray Tele Service, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the attachment of its bank account by the respondent authorities on August 1, 2023. In response to this grievance, the petitioner had previously submitted a representation on August 7, 2023, to the Assistant Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Durgapur. The respondent CGST authority, through their counsel, submitted that the Superintendent, CGST, Range-3, Durgapur-II, was the appropriate authority to address the petitioner's concerns regarding the bank account attachment.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Superintendent, CGST, Range-3, Durgapur-II, is the appropriate authority to consider the petitioner's grievance regarding the attachment of its bank account, as per the relevant provisions of the CGST Act and Rules? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition challenging the bank account attachment and subsequently made a representation to the Assistant Commissioner. The petitioner implicitly sought a resolution to the attachment. Revenue's Argument: The respondent CGST authority argued that the Superintendent, CGST, Range-3, Durgapur-II, was the correct authority to consider the petitioner's representation and grievance concerning the bank account attachment.
Sections Cited
Not specified in the judgment
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023 ks WPA 20053 of 2023 sl. 15 M/s. Ray Tele Service Vs The Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax & Central Excise, Durgapur Audit Commissionerate, & Ors. Ms. Ritika Kurmy, Ms. Priya Sarah Paul, Mr. Debayan Duta … For the Petitioner. Mr. K.K. Maiti, Mr. Tapan Bhanja … For the Respondent Nos. 1,2 & 3. Mrs. Rajashree Venket Kundalia, Mr. Abhradip Maity … For the Respondent No.
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. Petitioner has filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the action of the respondent authority attaching the Bank Account in question of the petitioner dated 1st August, 2023, being Annexure P-1 to the writ petition. It appears from the record that against the aforesaid grievance, petitioner has made a representation before the Assistant Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Durgapur, GST Division-II on 7th August, 2023 being Annexure P-11 to the writ petition. Mrs. Kundalia, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent/CGST author
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.