Susanta Devnath vs. The State Of West Bengal And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Susanta Devnath, proprietor of "Devnath Stores," filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 29th July, 2024, passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This order arose from a determination made under Section 73 of the said Act dated 12th September, 2023, concerning the tax period from 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2018. The petitioner was aggrieved by the Appellate Authority's failure to grant an accommodation. The appeal was validly filed with the required pre-deposit. A notice for personal hearing was served, but the petitioner did not appear on the scheduled dates. An unauthorized representative appeared on one occasion. The petitioner subsequently requested an adjournment, which was denied, and the appeal was decided on merits.
Held
The Court held that while the petitioner was offered an opportunity for a personal hearing, considering the peculiar facts of the case, it would be appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to place their case before the Appellate Authority. The Court found that remanding the matter back to the Appellate Authority was in the fitness of things. Accordingly, the order dated 29th July, 2024, passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the said Act was set aside. The consequential demand in Form APL-04 was also quashed. The Appellate Authority was directed to give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and decide the matter afresh. The Court expressly left undecided any issue related to the merits of the determination under Section 73.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Appellate Authority erred in not granting the petitioner an accommodation for a personal hearing, despite the circumstances presented, thereby violating principles of natural justice? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 107 and principles of natural justice). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they should be given one more opportunity to present their case before the Appellate Authority. They contended that the failure to appear on the scheduled dates was due to circumstances that warranted an adjournment, and the Appellate Authority's decision to proceed ex-parte without further accommodation was unjust. The petitioner sought to place their case properly to avoid an adverse decision. Revenue/State's Arguments: The respondents did not record any specific arguments against the petitioner's plea for an accommodation in the judgment. However, the facts indicate that the Appellate Authority had already adjourned the matter and that the representative who appeared was not authorized under Section 116 of the Act. The Appellate Authority proceeded to decide the appeal on merits after the petitioner's failure to appear with an authorized representative.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Section 73, Section 116
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
28th July, 2025 Item no. DL 5 Court No. 05
Asraf, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Juri iction Appellate Side
Case No. WPA 4318 of 2025
In the matter of : SUSANTA DEVNATH …. Petitioner VS.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX & ORS. ….Respondents For the Petitioner : Ms. Sanjana Jha Ms. Sukanya Dutta Mr. Bikash K. Roy Mr. Avinash Jha ….Advocates For the Respondents / State : Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty Mr. Saptak Sanyal Mr. Debraj Sahu ….Advocates
The petitioner is a proprietor of a stationary store run under the name and style of “Devnath Stores” and carries on such business within the juri iction of this Court.
Challenging an order passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) dated 29th July, 2024 arising out of a determination made under Section 73 of the Said Act dated 12th September, 2023 in respect of tax period 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2018, the instant writ petition has been filed. The petitioner is aggrieved by the failure on the part of the Page 2
Authorities to afford an accommodation to the petitioner.
Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it would transpire that the appeal was validly filed and was duly supported by the predeposit as is required for maintaining the appeal. A notice of personal hearing was duly served on the petitioner. On the date fixed for personal hearing, i.e., on 4th April, 2024 since none represented the petitioner, the matter was adjourned and refixed for hearing on 7th May, 2024. Though none appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 7th May, 2024, one Mr. Narayan Mishra appeared on 9th May, 2024. Unfortunately, the said Mr. Narayan Mishra was not an authorized representative within the meaning of Section 116 of the said Act and accordingly was not permitted to represent the petitioner.
Following the above, the petitioner had approached the Authorities with a request to adjourn the matter as the petitioner’s representative was waiting for Tax Practitioner’s Certificate. The Appellate Authority in the facts chose it fit not to adjourn the appeal any further and had accordingly decided the appeal on merits with the finding that he had no reason to interfere with the decision of the Proper Officer in respect
Page 3
of their order passed under Section 73 of the said Act.
Though the petitioner was offered opportunity of personal hearing, however, having regard to the peculiar facts recorded above and since the petitioner would submit that the petitioner should be given one more opportunity to place its case, I am of the view that in the fitness of things, it would be appropriate to remand the matter back to the Appellate Authority.
Accordingly, the Appellate Authority is directed to give an opportunity of personal hearing and to decide the matter afresh.
The order dated 29th July, 2024 passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the said Act is hereby set aside. Consequential demand in Form APL-04 stands quashed. However, there will be no order as to costs.
The instant writ petition stands disposed of.
All parties shall act on the basis of server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble High Court.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously after complying with all requisite formalities.
( Raja Basu Chowdhury, 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.