M/S. Vasudev Tracto Rollers vs. Nodal Officer/Assistant Commi,It Glitch CGST&Cxkolnc&Ors
Held
The Court held that the Nodal Officer/respondent no.1 was obligated to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation. The Court directed the respondent no.1 to consider and dispose of the representation, which was received on December 4, 2019, in accordance with the law. This disposal was to be done by passing a reasoned and/or speaking order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representatives. The respondent was given four weeks from the date of communication of the order to dispose of the representation and one week thereafter to communicate the decision to the petitioner. The Court explicitly stated that it had not gone into the merit of the representation and that the respondent must act strictly in accordance with the law. The ratio decidendi is that administrative authorities must address grievances arising from technical glitches in a timely and reasoned manner, affording natural justice.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Vasudev Tracto Rollers, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the inaction of the Nodal Officer/Assistant Commissioner, GST, Kolkata North Commissionerate. The petitioner had made a representation on December 4, 2019, requesting consideration of a claim that could not be filed due to a technical glitch in the GST system. The writ petition highlighted the details of this grievance and the respondent's failure to dispose of the representation. The court was presented with the petitioner's grievance and the respondent's lack of action.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent authority is obligated to consider and dispose of a representation made by the petitioner regarding a claim that could not be filed due to a technical glitch in the GST system, as per principles of natural justice and administrative law? The petitioner argued that the respondent authority's inaction on their representation, filed due to a technical glitch, was unsustainable and warranted judicial intervention. They contended that a failure to consider such a representation would cause prejudice. The respondent, represented by the Nodal Officer/Assistant Commissioner, GST, and the Union of India, did not explicitly record arguments against considering the representation. However, their presence indicated their role in the matter. The core issue revolved around the respondent's duty to address the petitioner's grievance arising from a system malfunction.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2021 p.b. Sl. No.146. W.P.A. 5042 of 2020 M/s. Vasudev Tracto Rollers Vs. Nodal Officer/Assistant Commissioner, IT Glitch CGST & CX, Kolkata North Commissionerate & Ors. (Via Video Conference) Mr. Pavel Das …….for the petitioner. Mr. Aishwarya Rajyashree. ……..for the respondent. Mr. Sujit Mitra. …….for the Union of India. Heard both the parties. It appears from page 31 of the writ petition that a representation has been made by the petitioner before the Nodal Officer/respondent no.1, GST, on 4th December, 2019 requesting for considering their claim which they could not make due to technical glitch in GST system. Details of such grievance will appear from the said representation and the inaction on the part of the respondent no.1 in disposing such representation. Considering the submission of the parties, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Nodal Officer/ respondent no.1 to consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation which appears at page 31 of the writ petition which was received by the authority concerned on 2 4th December, 2019, in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned and/or speak
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.