Sahanurbibi Mandal vs. State Of West Bengal And Anr.
Facts
The petitioner, Sahanurbibi Mandal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Calcutta challenging a show-cause notice dated April 21, 2022. The notice proposed to cancel her GST registration. The petitioner contended that she was unable to reply to the show-cause notice because it did not specify the officer before whom she should submit her objections. The State, represented by the learned Government Pleader, submitted that the name and designation of the officer to whom objections should be furnished were indeed provided to the petitioner.
Held
The Court did not entertain the writ petition. While the petitioner's grievance was that the show-cause notice failed to mention the officer to whom objections should be submitted, the learned Government Pleader for the State submitted that this information was provided to the petitioner. Based on this submission, the Court was not inclined to proceed with the writ petition. The Court dismissed the petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file her objections to the impugned show-cause notice within one week from the date of the order. The Court directed that if such objections are filed, they shall be considered by the concerned officer in accordance with law and in observance of the principles of natural justice. The issue of whether the notice was fundamentally flawed was not definitively decided, but the petitioner was given an opportunity to rectify the procedural lapse.
Key Issues
1. Whether the show-cause notice proposing cancellation of GST registration is vitiated by a procedural irregularity for failing to clearly mention the officer before whom objections are to be filed, thereby impeding the petitioner's ability to respond? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the show-cause notice was defective as it did not specify the officer to whom objections should be submitted, rendering it impossible for her to comply with the notice and respond appropriately. Revenue's contention: The State argued that the name and designation of the officer before whom objections were to be furnished were indeed communicated to the petitioner.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022 ks WPA 8043 of 2022 sl. 29 Sahanurbibi Mandal Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Sweta Mukherjee, Ms. Monideepa Banerjee … For the Petitioner.
Mr. A. Roy, Ld. GP Mr. T.M. Siddiqui, Mr. Debasish Ghosh … For the State.
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
Petitioner has filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the impugned show-cause-notice dated 21st April, 2022 proposing to cancel her registration under the relevant provision of GST on the ground that the petitioner is not able to give reply to the aforesaid show-cause-notice since it does not mention the officer before whom she has to make such objection.
Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the name and designation of the officer before whom such objection to the show- cause-notice has been furnished to the petitioner and considering this submission of learned Government Pleader, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition being WPA 8043 of 2022 and the same is dismissed with libert
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.