Debasish Mohan Saha vs. Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Beliaghata Charge And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Krishna Traders, challenged an order dated March 16, 2023, passed by the Appellate Authority under the GST Act. The Appellate Authority dismissed the petitioner's appeal on the technical ground of a 110-day delay in filing. The petitioner's explanation for the delay was not supported by material. The High Court considered the petitioner's willingness to pay a cost of Rs. 25,000/- for condoning the delay and the potential merit of the appeal.
Held
The High Court set aside the Appellate Authority's order dated March 16, 2023. The Court found that while the petitioner's explanation for the delay was not convincing, the interest of justice warranted considering the appeal on its merits. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's willingness to pay Rs. 25,000/- as costs for the delay. The matter was remanded back to the Appellate Authority to consider and dispose of the appeal on merits, subject to the petitioner paying the stipulated costs within 15 days and filing proof of payment. If the payment is made, the Appellate Authority is directed to decide the appeal within eight weeks after giving the petitioner a hearing. If the petitioner fails to pay the costs within the stipulated time, the Appellate Authority's original order of dismissal will stand revived. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Appellate Authority was justified in dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the technical ground of delay without considering its merits, given the explanation provided for the delay? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the delay in filing the appeal, though substantial, should be condoned in the interest of justice, especially considering the potential merit of the appeal. They offered to pay a cost of Rs. 25,000/- to compensate for the delay. Revenue's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific argument from the State (Revenue) regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal. The Appellate Authority's order, which is under challenge, was based on the technical ground of delay.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023 & Ors. Mr. Debasish Mohan Saha, Mr. Parag Kothari … For the Petitioner. Mr. A. Ray, Ld. GP., Mr. T.M. Siddiqui, Mr. S. Sanyal, Mr. Tanay Chakraborty … For the State. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 16th March, 2023, passed by the Appellate Authority under the relevant provisions of GST Act dismissing the appeal of the petitioner on the technical ground of delay of 110 days without going into the merits of the appeal itself. The explanation given by the petitioner for such delay is not very convincing and without any supporting material, however, in the interest of justice and taking into consideration that the appeal of the petitioner is meritorious and further taking into consideration the statement made by the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner that he is willing to pay a costs of Rs.25,000/- for condoning such delay, the aforesaid impugned order of the Appellate Authority dated 16th March, 2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded
2 back to the Appellate Authority concerned to consider and dispose of the appeal on merits, if petitioner pays the aforesaid costs to the WBGST Authority concerned within 15 days from date and files proof of the same before the Appellate Authority. If petitioner makes payment within the time stipulated herein the appeal of the petitioner shall be considered on merits and in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorised representative, within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing the proof of such payment. I case of failure on the part of the petitioner to make the aforesaid deposit within the time stipulated herein, this order will not have any force and the aforesaid impugned order of dismissal of the appeal dated 16th March, 2023 shall stand revived. With this observation and direction this writ petition being WPA 13191 of 2023 is disposed of. ( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )
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.