M/S Ranisati Industries LTD And Anr vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue Bureau Of Investgation And Ors
Facts
The petitioners, M/s. Ranisati Industries Ltd. & Anr., filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities to consider and dispose of their representation dated December 6, 2022. This representation was made against the alleged blocking of the petitioners' Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A of the CGST/WBGST Rules, 2017. The respondent authorities are the Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, Bureau of Investigation, South Bengal & Ors. The amount in dispute is not specified. The procedural history involves the petitioners submitting a representation to the authorities, which remained unaddressed, leading to the filing of the present writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the respondent Authority concerned should consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation dated December 6, 2022. The reasoning was based on the fact that the representation pertained to the alleged blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A of the CGST/WBGST Rules, 2017, and had not been addressed. The Court directed the authority to pass a reasoned and speaking order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or their authorized representative. The operative direction is to dispose of the representation within two weeks from the date of communication of the order. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent authority should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation dated December 6, 2022, concerning the blocking of their Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A of the CGST/WBGST Rules, 2017? (Question of law and procedure) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners argued that their representation against the blocking of their Electronic Credit Ledger has not been considered or disposed of by the respondent authority. They sought a direction for the authority to act on their representation. Revenue's Contention: The State (represented by the learned GP and other advocates) did not explicitly argue against the prayer for disposal of the representation. Their presence indicates their acknowledgment of the matter before the court.
Sections Cited
Rule 86A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023 ks WPA 28521 of 2022 sl. 27 M/s. Ranisati Industries Ltd. & Anr.
Vs Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, Bureau of Investigation, South Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Ankit Kanodia, Ms. Megha Agarwal, Mr. Jitesh Sah … For the Petitioners.
Mr. A. Ray, Ld. GP., Mr. T.M. Siddiqui, Mr. D. Ghosh, Mr. D. Sahu … For the State.
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
By this writ petition, petitioners have made an innocuous prayer of direction upon the respondent authority concerned to consider and dispose of its representation dated 6th December, 2022 as annexed to the writ petition against the alleged blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioners under Rule 86A of the CGST/WBGST Rules, 2017. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the parties, this writ petition being WPA 28521 of 2022 is disposed of by directing the respondent Authority concerned to consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned
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.