Megacity Cement Private Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner State Tax And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Megacity Cement Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated May 23, 2023, which rejected their appeal. The appeal was against an order passed under Section 74 of the Central/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, dated March 10, 2022, pertaining to the tax period July 2017 to January 2018. The petitioner contended that the appellate authority made a computation error regarding the delay in filing the appeal, which was influenced by an incorrect date of the impugned order entered by the petitioner in Form GST APL-01. The Court noted that the order was passed during the Covid period and there was a delay of approximately 48 days.
Held
The Court held that there was a prima facie computation error on the part of the appellate authority in deciding the length of the delay, which may have been influenced by the petitioner's incorrect incorporation of the order's date in Form GST APL-01. Considering the order was passed during the Covid period and the delay was approximately 48 days, the Court was inclined to remand the matter back to the appellate authority. However, noting that the petitioner had belatedly approached the High Court and the reasons for this delay were not entirely explained, the Court directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards costs to the High Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks. Upon payment, the appellate authority was directed to hear and dispose of the appeal on its merits. The order passed by the appellate authority dated May 23, 2023, was set aside.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appellate authority erred in computing the delay in filing the appeal, considering the order was passed during the Covid period and the petitioner's submission of an incorrect date in Form GST APL-01? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the appellate authority made a computation error in determining the delay, which was exacerbated by their own mistake in entering the wrong date in the appeal form. They sought consideration of the delay in light of the prevailing Covid-19 circumstances. Revenue's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State (revenue) regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal. The focus appears to be on the procedural aspects and the discretion of the Court.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
M/L 26 11.06.2025 sb Ct 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 3047 of 2025
Megacity Cement Private Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner State Tax, Jorabagan Charge & Ors.
Mr. Prasenjit Burman
Mr. Arindam Gupta
Ms. Payel Koley
Mr. Swapnesh Mallik
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Anirban Ray
Md. T. M. Siddiqui
Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty
Mr. Saptak Sanyal
… For the State.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
Challenging the order dated 23rd May, 2023, rejecting the appeal from the order passed under Section 74 of the Central/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) dated 10th March, 2022 for the tax period July, 2017 to January, 2018, the instant writ petition has been filed.
Prima facie, it would transpire that there is a computation error on the part of the appellate authority in deciding the length of delay, though the same may have been influenced by the wrong
2 incorporation of the date of the order impugned in Form GST APL-01 by the petitioner.
Be that as it may, taking into consideration the fact that the order was passed during the Covid period and noting that there was a delay of approximately 48 days, I am inclined to remand the matter back to the appellate authority, however, at the same time noting that the petitioner has belatedly approached this Court and the reason for the delay in approaching this Court provided for by the petitioner being not entirely explained, I am of the view that the petitioner should be directed to make payment of Rs.10,000/- towards costs with the High Court Legal Services Committee. If such payment is made within two weeks from date, the appellate authority having regard to the observations made hereinabove shall hear out and dispose of the appeal on merits, in accordance with law.
As a sequel thereto, the order passed by the appellate authority dated 23rd May, 2023 is set aside.
With the above observations and directions the writ petition is disposed of. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)
3
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.