Sunita Jalan vs. Assistant Commissioner, Beliaghata Charge And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The appellant, Sunita Jalan, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 4th February 2020, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Beliaghata Charge, canceling her GST registration under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act. The learned Single Judge acknowledged that the cancellation order was passed without granting the appellant an opportunity of hearing and was a non-speaking order. However, the writ petition was dismissed due to a delay in filing, as it was filed in August 2022, while the cancellation order was dated 4th February 2020. This intra-Court appeal was filed against the Single Judge's dismissal order.
Held
The Court held that the delay in approaching the High Court cannot be the sole reason for non-suiting the appellant when the order of cancellation of registration was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was a non-speaking order. The Court reasoned that affording a reasonable opportunity to the appellant to present her case and for the authority to pass a speaking order after such an opportunity is paramount. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the order of the writ petition was set aside, and the order of cancellation of registration dated 4th February 2020 was also set aside. The show cause notice for cancellation of registration dated 4th February 2020 was restored. The authority was directed to issue a fresh notice within 10 days, granting the appellant 30 days to reply, followed by a personal hearing and a reasoned order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the delay in filing the writ petition can be a sole ground for dismissing the petition when the impugned order of cancellation of registration was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was a non-speaking order? The appellant argued that the delay should not be a bar to relief when fundamental procedural fairness has been violated. The revenue contended that the delay was inordinate and unexplained, disentitling the appellant to extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The appellant relied on the principle that procedural irregularities, especially a lack of natural justice, can outweigh delays. The revenue did not appear to have made specific arguments regarding the merits of the cancellation order itself, focusing primarily on the delay.
Sections Cited
West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Item no. 29 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURI ICTION
APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And The Hon’ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas MAT 667 of 2020 with IA No. CAN 1 of 2020
Sunita Jalan vs. Assistant Commissioner, Beliaghata Charge & ors. For the Appellant : Mr. Suryaneel Das
For Respondent : Mr. A. Ray Mr. T.M. Siddiqui Mr. D. Ghosh Mr. V. Kothari
Heard on : 01.09.2022 Judgment on : 01.09.2022 T.S. Sivagnanam J.: 1) This intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dated 16.09.2020 passed in WPA 6311 of 2020. The appellant had filed the writ petition challenging the order canceling the appellant’s registration under the provisions of West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act dated 4th February, 2022. The learned Single Judge in the impugned order has recorded a specific finding that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the appellant prior to issuance of the order of cancellation. The learned Single Judge has also observed that the order of cancellation of registration is a non-speaking order. However, the writ petition was dismissed on the short ground that though the order of cancellation was passed on 4th February,2020 but the writ petition has been filed in August,2022. 2) In our considered view that if the order of cancellation of registration has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and it is a non-speaking order, the delay in approaching this cannot be a sole reason for non-suit in the appellant. Therefore, we are of the view that the appellant should afford a reasonable opportunity to put forth her case and the authority should pass a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. 2
3) On the said short ground we are inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order passed in the writ petition is set aside. Consequently, the order of cancellation of registration dated 4th February, 2020 is set aside and the show cause notice for cancellation of registration dated 4th February, 2020 stands restored. The authority concerned is directed to issue another notice indicating the time frame within which the appellant should submit her reply. This notice shall be issued by the authority within 10 days from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order. Thereafter, the appellant shall be granted 30 days therefrom to reply and after which the appellant shall be heard in person and pass a reasoned order on merit in accordance with law. 4) In the light of the above MAT 667 of 2020 along with CAN 1 of 2020 are disposed of. 5) Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities. (T. S. Sivagnanam, J.) 3
(Prasenjit Biswas, J.) RP/AN 4
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.