M/S. S. Entp. & Anr. vs. Supdt. Anti Evasion, Gr.C, CGST & Cx, Kol (S) C0Mm. & Ors.
Held
The Court held that the impugned summon dated October 27, 2017, had lost its force by the time the matter was being heard, as the stipulated date of appearance (November 6, 2017) had long passed. Consequently, the cause of action for challenging the summon did not survive. The Court noted that the petitioner had already appeared and submitted documents in response to the summon. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of on the grounds that the challenge to the summon was no longer relevant. The Court clarified that this disposal would not prevent the respondents from proceeding in accordance with law in the future if a new occasion arose. Any interim order, if granted, was vacated.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. S. Enterprise & Anr., challenged a summon dated October 27, 2017, issued by the Superintendent of Anti-Evasion, CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate. The summon directed the petitioner to appear on November 6, 2017. The petitioner argued that the summon had lost its force as the date for appearance had passed and that they had already appeared and submitted documents in response to the summon. The writ petition was filed in 2017. The respondents included the Superintendent of Anti-Evasion and other authorities.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition challenging the summon dated October 27, 2017, issued by the respondent authorities, is maintainable and has survived the passage of time, considering the date of appearance stipulated in the summon has long passed. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned summon had lost its force and the cause of action did not survive at present, as the date for appearance had already passed. They also stated that they had complied with the summon by appearing and submitting documents. Revenue/State's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent authorities or the State regarding the maintainability of the petition or the validity of the summon after the stipulated date.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022. p.b. Sl. No.
W.P.A. 29298 of 2017 (Through Video Conference) M/s. S. Enterprise & Anr. Vs. Superintendent of Anti-Evasion, Gr. C, CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate & Ors. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Mr. Malay Dhar, Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta. ………for the petitioners. Mr. Somnath Ganguly, Ms. Priyamvada Singh. ……..for the respondent no.
Mr. A. Ray, Mr. S. Mukherjee, Mr. N. Chatterjee. ……..for the State. Ms. Manasi Mukherjee. ……..for the respondent. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. In this matter, petitioner has challenged the impugned summon dated 27th October, 2017 issued by the respondent authorities concerned by which petitioner was directed to appear on 6th November, 2017, in my view, the impugned summon has lost its force today and against the issuance of impugned summon, cause of action does not survive at present. Petitioner also submits that in response to the impugned summon, petitioner has already appeared and submitted documents.
2 Considering these facts, this writ petition being WPA No.29298 of 2017 is disposed of. Disposal of this writ petition will not prevent the respondents concerned to proceed in accordance with law
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.