Ashis Ghosh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Facts
The writ petitioner, Ashis Ghosh, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the non-consideration of his reply to a notice dated January 16, 2023, issued by the respondent CGST authorities. The CGST authorities, represented by Mr. Maiti, produced an intimation dated July 12, 2023, which was issued based on the petitioner's reply dated January 2, 2023. This intimation informed the petitioner that he was at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with the law. A copy of this intimation was provided to the petitioner's counsel. The Court was informed that the issue had been addressed by the intimation.
Held
The Court noted that the respondent CGST authority had produced an intimation dated July 12, 2023, which was issued based on the petitioner's reply dated January 2, 2023. This intimation advised the petitioner that he was at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with the law. The Court was satisfied that the intimation had been provided to the petitioner's counsel. Therefore, in view of the issuance of this intimation, the Court found no further order to be necessary in the writ petition. The principle derived is that if a respondent authority demonstrates that a subsequent action has been taken in response to a petitioner's grievance, and the petitioner is given liberty to proceed, the writ court may deem the matter resolved without further adjudication.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CGST authorities failed to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner to the notice dated January 16, 2023, thereby violating principles of natural justice, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the subsequent intimation dated July 12, 2023, issued by the CGST authorities, adequately addresses the petitioner's grievance regarding the non-consideration of his reply? The petitioner argued that his reply to the notice dated January 16, 2023, was not considered by the CGST authorities. The respondent CGST authority, through its counsel, submitted that an intimation dated July 12, 2023, was issued based on the petitioner's reply, allowing him to take further steps. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the petitioner regarding the adequacy of the intimation or any specific legal provisions relied upon by either party.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023 PB Sl. No.
WPA 16428 of 2023 Ashis Ghosh Vs Union of India & Ors. Mr. Asis Bhattacharya. … For the Petitioner. Ms. Sanjukta Gupta. ……..for the UOI. Mr. K. K. Maiti, Mr. Tapan Bhanja. ……for the CGST authority Mr. A. Ray, Mr. T. M. Siddiqui, Mr. S. Sanyal. …….for the CGST authority. Mr. Tapash Kr. Mondal. …..for the Zilla Parishad. The main grievance of the writ petitioner in this writ petition is non-consideration of his reply to the notice dated 16th January, 2023, by the respondent CGST authorities concerned being Annexure P-4 to the writ petition. Mr. Maiti, learned advocate for the respondent CGST authority concerned produces an intimation dated 12th July, 2023, issued by the respondent authorities concerned on the basis of the aforesaid reply of the petitioner dated 2nd January, 2023. Mr. Maiti further submits that in view of the aforesaid intimation dated 12th July, 2023, petitioner is at 2 liberty to take appropriate step in accordance with law. It is recorded that the copy of the aforesaid intimation which has been filed in Court has also been handed over to the learned advocate appeari
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.