Mala Panda vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Revenue, Shibpur Charge And Ors.
Facts
The petitioner, Mala Panda, challenged an order dated April 19, 2023, passed by the appellate authority under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax (WBGST) Act. The appeal was dismissed solely on the grounds of an 11-month delay in filing, without considering the merits of the case. The petitioner attributed the delay to their lawyer's fault. The petitioner argued that they were ready to pay a cost of Rs. 1 lakh to have the delay condoned.
Held
The Court set aside the impugned order dated April 19, 2023, passed by the appellate authority. The reasoning was that the appellate authority had dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay without examining the merits. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's offer to pay a cost of Rs. 1 lakh for condoning the inordinate delay. The decision was made conditional upon the petitioner paying Rs. 1 lakh to the GST authority within 10 days and submitting proof of payment to the appellate authority. Upon such proof being filed, the appellate authority is directed to consider and dispose of the appeal on its merits. Additionally, the respondent WBGST authority is directed to immediately lift the attachment order on the petitioner's bank account upon receiving proof of the cost payment. If the petitioner fails to pay the cost, the appellate authority's order will stand revived.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the petitioner's appeal solely on the ground of delay without considering the merits of the case, particularly when the delay was attributed to the petitioner's lawyer? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the delay was due to their lawyer's error and that they were willing to pay a cost of Rs. 1 lakh to have the delay condoned, seeking a decision on the merits of their appeal. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State or Revenue regarding the delay or the merits of the case.
Sections Cited
WBGST Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023. Revenue, Shibpur Charge & Ors. Mr. Anil Kr. Dugar, Mr. Debabrata Ghosh. … For the Petitioner. Mr. A. Ray, Mr. T. M. Siddiqui, Mr. S. Sanyal. ……..for the State. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 19th April, 2023 passed by the appellate authority under the WBGST Act, dismissing the appeal in question filed by the petitioner, on the ground of delay of more than 11 months in filing the appeal without going into the merit of the case. The whole case of the petitioner in explanation of such delay is that it was due to the fault of the petitioner’s Lawyer in filing the appeal. Such type of explanation for delay in pursuing a case by the assessee/petitioner of such inordinate delay is not acceptable to this Court since petitioner should always be vigilant and diligent in pursuing his case
2 and by simply handing over the papers to her Lawyer and sleeping comfortably cannot be a justification for such inordinate delay and if this type of inordinate
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.