Abhijit Roy vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.
Facts
The petitioner, Abhijit Roy, challenged an intimation dated February 11, 2022, issued under Section 74(5) of the WBGST Act, and the subsequent realization of penalty from his Electronic Credit Ledger. The State GST authority informed the Court that a final adjudication order had been passed on March 29, 2022, and was available on the department's portal. The authority argued that an alternative remedy by way of statutory appeal was available, and the writ court should not interfere. The amount in dispute is not specified, nor is the specific tax period.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file a statutory appeal against the adjudication order dated March 29, 2022. This liberty is subject to the petitioner complying with statutory formalities within two weeks from the date of the order. If the appeal is filed within this stipulated time, the appellate authority is directed not to raise the point of limitation and to consider the appeal on its merits. Furthermore, the petitioner is entitled to claim a refund of any excess amount realized beyond the required pre-deposit for filing the statutory appeal from the appropriate authority in accordance with law. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original challenge to the intimation or the penalty.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ court should entertain a writ petition challenging an intimation under Section 74(5) of the WBGST Act when a final adjudication order has been passed and a statutory appeal remedy is available. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner is challenging the intimation and the action of realizing penalty from the Electronic Credit Ledger. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the petitioner regarding the availability of alternative remedy or the merits of the case. Revenue's contention: The State GST authority argued that a final adjudication order has been passed, making a statutory appeal the appropriate remedy, and therefore, the writ court should not interfere.
Sections Cited
Section 74(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022. p.b. Sl. No.
W.P.A. 18763 of 2022 Abhijit Roy Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Jit Ray, Mr. Diptomoy Talukder. ……..for the petitioner. Mr. A. Ray, Mr. S. Mukherjee, Mr. D. Ghosh, Mr. D. Sahu. ……..for the State. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned intimation dated 11th February, 2022 under Section 74 Sub-Section (5) of the WBGST Act and the action of the authority in realizing the penalty from the petitioner’s Electronic Credit Ledger and in this regard, Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing for the State GST authority was asked to take appropriate instruction in the matter which he has filed in Court today and submits that the final adjudication order has already been passed on 29th March, 2022 and the said order is available on the official portal of the department and as such alternative remedy by way of statutory appeal is available to the petitioner which the petitioner can avail of and this writ court should not interfere in this matter.
2 Considering the submission of the parties, this writ petition being WPA No.18763 of 2022 is disposed of by granting liber
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.