M/S B P Ganguly & Co & Anr vs. Supdt Of Anti Evasion Gr C CGST & Cx Kol South Comm & Ors.
Held
The Court held that the impugned summons have lost their force as the dates for appearance have passed and the petitioners have already appeared and submitted documents in response. Consequently, the cause of action for challenging the summons does not survive at present. The Court disposed of the writ petition without any further order, stating that this disposal would not prevent the respondents from proceeding in accordance with law in the future if the occasion arises. Any interim order, if granted, was vacated.
Facts
The petitioners, M/s. B.P. Ganguly & Co. & Anr., challenged two summons dated 28th July, 2017, and 27th October, 2017, issued by the Superintendent of Anti-Evasion, CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate. These summons directed the petitioners to appear on 7th August, 2017, and 2nd November, 2017, respectively. The petitioners submitted that they had already appeared in response to these summons and furnished documents. The writ petition was filed in 2017.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cause of action for challenging the impugned summons survives, considering the dates of appearance directed by the summons have long passed and the petitioners have already appeared and submitted documents. Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that the impugned summons have lost their force as the dates for appearance have passed and they have already complied by appearing and submitting documents. Therefore, the cause of action no longer survives. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue or state regarding the survival of the cause of action or the validity of the summons.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022 ks WPA 29450 of 2017 sl. 8 M/s. B.P. Ganguly & Co. & Anr.
Vs Superintendent of Anti-Evasion, Gr. ‘C’, CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate & Ors.
Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Ld. Sr. Adv., Ms. A. Bazaz … For the Petitioners.
Mr. Somnath Ganguly, Mr. Priyamvada Singh … For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
Mr. A. Roy, Ld. GP Mr. T.M. Siddiqui, Mr. Debasish Ghosh … For the State.
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
In this matter, petitioners have challenged the impugned summon dated 28th July, 2017 and 27th October, 2017 issued by the respondent authorities concerned by which petitioners were directed to appear on 7th August, 2017 and 2nd November, 2017 in my view, the impugned summons have lost its force today and against the issuance of impugned summons, cause of action does not survive at present.
Petitioners also submit that in response to the impugned summons, petitioners have already appeared and submitted documents.
Considering these facts, this writ petition be
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.