Cray Commotrade PVT LTD vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Barrackpore Charge And Ors

Facts

The petitioner, Cray Commotrade Private Limited, has filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated December 1, 2022, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Barrackpore Charge. The order was issued under Section 73(9) of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax (WBGST) Act, read with Rule 142 of the WBGST Rules. The petitioner sought to challenge this order. The revenue, represented by the State, appeared through its learned Government Pleader and other advocates. The petitioner indicated readiness to file a statutory appeal against the impugned order and requested time to do so.

Held

The Court acknowledged that the impugned adjudication order dated December 1, 2022, is an appellable order under the statute. Considering the facts and circumstances, and specifically the submission of the petitioner's advocate that the petitioner is ready and willing to file a statutory appeal and is praying for time, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to file a statutory appeal against the adjudication order within thirty days from the date of the order. This liberty is subject to the compliance of all other formalities. The Court further directed that if the appeal is filed within the stipulated time, it shall be heard and disposed of on merit, without insisting on the point of limitation. The Court also noted that the petitioner did not press the issue of the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(a) of the CGST/WBGST Act. No other issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned adjudication order dated December 1, 2022, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax under Section 73(9) of the WBGST Act read with Rule 142 of the WBGST Rules, is valid and has been correctly passed? 2. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a statutory appeal against the said order, and if so, whether the appeal should be considered on merits without insisting on the point of limitation? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they are ready and willing to file a statutory appeal against the impugned adjudication order and prayed for time to do so. The petitioner also indicated that they do not press the issue of the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(a) of the CGST/WBGST Act. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the revenue or State regarding the merits of the adjudication order or the petitioner's prayer for filing a statutory appeal. The State was represented and heard.