Mihir Kumar Biswas vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Revenue, State Tax, Krishnanagar Charge And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Mihir Kumar Biswas, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Krishnanagar Charge, and an appellate order dated 07.07.2026 passed by the appellate authority. The petitioner's appeal before the appellate authority was dismissed solely on the ground of limitation. The petitioner contended that a show cause notice dated 22.12.2023 was uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab without any separate intimation, preventing him from responding. He only became aware of the adjudication order in February 2026. The State respondents argued that the petitioner was granted ample opportunities and the appeal was rightly dismissed on limitation.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case. It observed that the show cause notice was uploaded only under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, and no separate intimation was provided to the petitioner. This lack of intimation prevented the petitioner from replying to the notice, which constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice. Since the petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the appellate authority solely on the ground of limitation and not on merits, and considering the peculiar facts of the case, the Court found interference warranted in the interest of justice. The Court quashed and set aside the appellate order dated 07.07.2026 and the adjudication order dated 18.04.2024. Respondent No. 2 was directed to revisit the issue by considering the petitioner's appeal on its merits, afford an opportunity of hearing, and pass a fresh reasoned order within 12 weeks. The decision was to be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereafter.

Key Issues

1. Whether the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal by the appellate authority solely on the ground of limitation, without considering the merits, is legally sustainable, particularly in light of the petitioner's contention that he was not properly intimated about the show cause notice, thereby violating principles of natural justice (turning on Section 107 of the WBGST Act and CGST Act)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was uploaded only on the GST portal under 'Additional Notice and Orders' without any separate intimation, leading to his inability to respond. This failure to provide actual intimation, he contended, violated principles of natural justice and the prescribed procedure under the Act. Consequently, the dismissal of his appeal on limitation without considering the merits was illegal. State respondents' arguments: The State respondents contended that the petitioner had been afforded ample opportunities to defend his case, and therefore, the appeal was correctly dismissed on the ground of limitation.