Latika Ghosh vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Raiganj Charge And Others
Original PDF →Facts
In WPA 7159 of 2020, the petitioner's counsel indicated a change of advocate but no new vakalatnama was filed, leading the Court to remove the petition from the list temporarily. In WPA 7272 of 2020, the petitioner, represented by Mr. Ray, informed the Court that the entire proceeding initiated by a show cause notice dated August 5, 2024, had been dropped by an order dated November 26, 2024, passed under Section 73/74 of the West Bengal/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Consequently, the petitioner no longer wished to pursue the writ petition. The State respondents filed an affidavit-in-opposition, which was taken on record, and did not oppose the petitioner's prayer.
Held
In WPA 7159 of 2020, the Court held that the writ petition should be removed from the list for the time being because the records did not reveal any new advocate filing a vakalatnama, despite the previous advocate indicating a change. This decision was based on procedural grounds. The Court did not decide on the merits of any GST-related issue for this petition. In WPA 7272 of 2020, the Court accepted the petitioner's submission that the proceedings initiated by the show cause notice dated August 5, 2024, had been dropped by an order dated November 26, 2024, passed under Section 73/74 of the West Bengal/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. As the petitioner no longer wished to proceed, the Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed. The State respondents did not oppose this dismissal. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition WPA 7159 of 2020 should be dismissed from the list due to a change in the petitioner's advocate without a formal filing of a new vakalatnama, as per the procedural requirements of the Court. The petitioner's counsel argued for its removal from the list due to this procedural issue. The State's position on this specific issue is not recorded. 2. Whether the writ petition WPA 7272 of 2020 should be dismissed as not pressed, given that the underlying proceedings initiated by a show cause notice dated August 5, 2024, under Section 73/74 of the West Bengal/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, have been dropped by an order dated November 26, 2024. The petitioner argued that the dropping of proceedings rendered the writ petition infructuous. The State respondents did not oppose this prayer.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1-2 03.03.2025 sb Ct 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 7159 of 2020
Rainbow Infrastructure Private Limited & Anr. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Goods and Services Tax, Barrackpore Zone & Ors.
With WPA 7272 of 2020 Latika Ghosh Versus Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Raiganj Charge & Ors.
Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray
Mr. Subhasis Podder
Ms. Shiwani Shaw
Mr. Animitra Roy
… For the petitioners.
Mr. Anirban Ray, Ld. GP
Mr. T. M. Siddiqui
Mr. N. Chatterjee
Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty
Mr. Saptak Sanyal
… For the State.
In re: WPA 7159 of 2020
Mr. Ray, learned advocate for the petitioners would submit that he has already given no objection for change of advocate, however, since records do not reveal any new advocate has filed vakalatnama, I am of the view that the aforesaid writ petition should go out of the list for the time being. In re: WPA 7272 of 2020
Mr. Ray, learned advocate, representing the petitioner by placing before this Court the order dated 26th
2 November, 2024 passed under Section 73/74 of the West Bengal/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 would submit that the entire proceeding initiated on the basis of the show cause notice dated 5th August, 2024 has since been dropped. Having regard thereto, the petitioner does not wish to proceed with the instant writ petition.
Let a copy of the aforesaid order dated 26th November, 2024, as placed before this Court, be retained with the records.
Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate, representing the State respondents files before this Court the affidavit- in-opposition, which is taken on record. He does not oppose the prayer of Mr. Ray.
Having regard thereto, let the writ petition, being WPA 7272 of 2020 be dismissed as not pressed.
(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.