M/S. Karukrit Const. & Anr. vs. Supdt. Anti-Evasion, Gr. C, CGST & Cx Kol. (S) Comm. & Ors.
Held
The Court held that the impugned summons dated August 7, 2017, and October 27, 2017, had lost their force and the cause of action for challenging them did not survive at the present time. This was primarily because the petitioners had already appeared before the authorities and submitted the necessary documents in compliance with the summons. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition without passing any further order on the merits of the challenge to the summons. The disposal was based on the supervening event of compliance, rendering the challenge moot. The Court also clarified that this disposal would not prevent the respondents from proceeding in accordance with law in the future if a fresh occasion arose. The interim order, if any, was vacated.
Facts
The petitioners, M/s. Karukrit Construction & Anr., challenged two summons dated August 7, 2017, and October 27, 2017, issued by the Superintendent of Anti-Evasion, CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate. These summons directed the petitioners to appear on August 23, 2017, and November 1, 2017, respectively. The petitioners submitted that they had already appeared in response to these summons and furnished the required documents. The court noted that the impugned summons had lost their force and the cause of action did not survive at the present time.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cause of action for challenging the impugned summons dated August 7, 2017, and October 27, 2017, survives at the present time, considering the petitioners have already appeared and submitted documents in response to them. Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that the impugned summons had lost their force as they had already complied with the directions by appearing and submitting documents. Therefore, the writ petition challenging these summons was rendered infructuous. Revenue/State: No specific arguments recorded in the judgment 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 29281 of 2017 sl. 2 M/s. Karukrit Construction & Anr.
Vs Superintendent of Anti-Evasion, Gr. ‘C’, CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate & Ors.
Mr. Malay Dhar, Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta … For the Petitioners.
Mr. Somnath Ganguly, Mr. Sukalpa Seal 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 7th August, 2017 and 27th October, 2017 issued by the respondent authorities concerned by which petitioners were directed to appear on 23rd August, 2017 and 1st November, 2017 in my view, the impugned summons have lost its force today and against the issuance of impugned summon, cause of action does not survive at present. Petitioners also submit that in response to the impugned summon, petitioners have already appeared and submitted documents.
Considering these facts, this writ petition being WPA 292
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.