M/S Kb Engineers vs. The Assistant/Deputy Commissioner, Junglepur Division And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. K B Engineers, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging two grievances: the alleged inaction of the CGST authority in considering its representations for rectification of its GSTR-3B returns, and an impugned show-cause notice dated January 24, 2023. The petitioner had sought extensions to reply to the show-cause notice. The respondent CGST authority submitted that the petitioner's last representation dated August 25, 2022, was considered when issuing the show-cause notice. The Court was not inclined to interfere with the show-cause notice itself, finding it was not issued without jurisdiction.
Held
The Court held that it was not inclined to interfere with the impugned show-cause notice as it was not issued without jurisdiction or by an authority lacking inherent jurisdiction. Regarding the petitioner's representations, the respondent CGST authority stated that the last representation dated August 25, 2022, was taken into consideration when issuing the show-cause notice. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of by extending the time for the petitioner to file a reply to the show-cause notice by two weeks from the date of the order. The Court directed that if the reply is filed, it shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner was also granted the liberty to raise all points raised in the writ petition before the authority during the hearing.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CGST authority has failed to consider the petitioner's representations for rectification of its GSTR-3B returns, and if so, what is the consequence? The petitioner argued that the authority had been sitting on its representations. The respondent CGST authority contended that the last representation dated August 25, 2022, was indeed considered at the time of issuing the show-cause notice. 2. Whether the impugned show-cause notice dated January 24, 2023, issued by the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner, Junglepur Division, Haldia CGST & CX, is liable to be quashed or interfered with? The petitioner's grievance was primarily against the show-cause notice. The respondent CGST authority argued that the show-cause notice was not without jurisdiction and therefore, the Court should not interfere at this stage.
Sections Cited
GSTR-3B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023 PB Sl. No.
WPA 8123 of 2023
M/s. K B Engineers Vs Assistant/Deputy Commissioner Junglepur Division, Haldia CGST & CX, Commissionerate & Ors. Mr. Avra Mazumder, Mr. Ramesh Kr. Patodia, Ms. Megha Agarwal, Mr. Suman Bhowmik, Mr. Samrat Das. … For the Petitioner. Mr. B. P. Banerjee, Mr. Tapan Bhanja. …….for the CGST authority. Mr. S. Bera, Mr. A. Pandey. …….For the UOI. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. Petitioner has filed this writ petition raising two fold grievances, namely, the allegation of sitting over series of the representations of the petitioner for rectification of its return relating to GSTR-3B and secondly, against the impugned show-cause notice dated 24th January, 2023, issued by the respondents CGST authority concerned by which petitioner was asked to give reply within one month from the date of receipt of such impugned show-cause notice which petitioner has not replied and taken time twice as appears from record.
2 So far as the allegation of non-consideration of petitioner’s representations are concerned, Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate representing the respondent CGST authority submits that the last such representation dated 25th August, 2022 has already been taken into consideration at the time of issuing show-cause notice. Now, so far as interference of the impugned show-cause notice is concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere against the show-cause notice since it is not without juri iction or that it has been issued by a person having inherent lack of juri iction. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and submission of the parties, this writ petition being WPA 8123 of 2023 is disposed of by extending time to give reply to the impugned show-cause notice dated 24th January, 2023 by two weeks from date and if such reply is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned and speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representatives. At the time of hearing, petitioner shall be entitled to raise all the points raised in this writ petition, before the authority concerned. ( Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
3
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.