Vikrma Impex PVT. LTD. vs. Goods And Service Tax Network And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the Commissioner of Kolkata, South CGST & CX, Kolkata (respondent No. 2) must consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated August 14, 2019. This disposal must be in accordance with the law, following a reasoned and speaking order. The Commissioner is also directed to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the proforma respondent No. 7, or their authorized representatives. The decision is to be communicated to the parties within one week after the disposal. The Court explicitly stated that it had not examined the merits of the case, and the respondent authority is to decide the petitioner's case based on its own merits and strictly in accordance with law. No specific sections of the CGST/SGST Act or Rules were discussed in relation to the merits of the representation.

Facts

The petitioner, Vikrama Impex Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the inaction of the GST authority. The petitioner had submitted a representation on August 14, 2019, detailing their grievances, but this representation had not been considered by the concerned GST authority to date. The petition was filed against the Goods & Service Tax Council and other respondents, including the Commissioner of Kolkata, South CGST & CX, Kolkata (respondent No. 2). The amount in dispute and the specific tax period(s) are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history primarily involves the petitioner's representation and the subsequent filing of the writ petition due to the lack of a response.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent No. 2, the Commissioner of Kolkata, South CGST & CX, Kolkata, has failed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated August 14, 2019, in accordance with law? (Question of law). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that their representation, submitted on August 14, 2019, had not been considered by the GST authority, leading to the present writ petition. They sought a direction for the authority to address their grievances. Revenue's contention: The judgment records submissions from the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, but specific contentions from the Revenue or Union of India regarding the petitioner's representation are not detailed. The court's disposal indicates an acknowledgment of the petitioner's grievance regarding the unaddressed representation.