Rajesh Bhatia vs. Supdt. Of CGST And Cx, Range -Ii And Ors.
Held
The Court held that it cannot, in exercise of its constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, sit as an appellate authority over the impugned adjudication order. The Court found that the impugned order was elaborate, reasoned, speaking, and based on material facts and evidence. It was also noted that the petitioner had failed to avail the statutory appellate remedy within the prescribed limitation period and that the order was not passed by an authority lacking inherent jurisdiction, nor was there a patent violation of natural justice, nor was the order contrary to any specific statutory provision. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed. However, the dismissal was without prejudice to the petitioner's right to avail any other remedy available under the law.
Facts
The petitioner, Rajesh Bhatia, challenged an adjudication order passed by the Superintendent of CGST & CX, Range – II, Dankuni Division, Howrah CGST Commissionerate & Ors. under the WBGST Act. The petitioner filed this writ petition approximately eight months after receiving the impugned order, by which time the period for filing an appeal had expired. The petitioner did not avail the statutory appellate remedy. The impugned order is described as elaborate, with detailed discussion, and spans 29 pages. The Court noted that the order was not passed by an authority lacking inherent jurisdiction, nor was there a patent violation of natural justice principles, nor was the order contrary to any specific statutory provision. The order is reasoned, speaking, and based on material facts and evidence.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can act as an appellate authority to re-examine the findings of fact and evidence in an elaborate, reasoned, and speaking adjudication order passed by the GST authorities, especially when a statutory appellate remedy is available but has not been availed within the prescribed limitation period. Petitioner's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the adjudication order. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue/customs authority. However, the Court's reasoning implies that the revenue's position, as reflected in the adjudication order, was based on material facts and evidence.
Sections Cited
Article 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022. p.b. Sl. No.
WPA 26301 of 2022 Rajesh Bhatia Vs. Superintendent of CGST & CX, Range – II, Dankuni Division, Howrah CGST Commissionerate & Ors. Mr. Sandip Choraria, Mr. R. Chatterjee. ……..for the petitioner. Mr. B. P. Banerjee, Mr. Abhradip Maity. ……..for the customs authority. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned adjudication order passed by the respondents under WBGST Act. I have perused the impugned adjudication order which is quite elaborate and have detailed discussion and it consists of 29 pages. Other points to be recorded in this matter is that the impugned order is an appellable order under the statute which he did not avail and has filed this writ petition almost after eight months from the date of receipt of the impugned order by allowing the time of limitation for filing the appeal to expire. This is also not a case where the impugned order has been passed by an authority having inherent lack of jurisdiction or it is also not a case where there is a patent violation of principle of natural justice by not allowing the 2 petitioner opportunity of hearing. It is also
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.