Case Law Details
Raju Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal And Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
Material Facts
The petitioner challenged the appellate order dated 28.01.2026 passed under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, by which the appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation. The dispute arose from a Form GST DRC-01 notice dated 26.09.2024 for the period March 2021 to April 2022 demanding tax, interest and penalty.
The petitioner submitted that the show cause notice was uploaded only under the “Additional notice and orders” tab on the GST portal, preventing a response. The petitioner became aware of the adjudication order dated 03.07.2025 only after receiving a recovery email dated 19.11.2025. An amount of ₹2,33,254 was recovered from the Electronic Credit Ledger on 12.03.2025 and a further ₹3,75,830 on 23.02.2026, resulting in recovery of 46% of the disputed demand of ₹13,13,468. The appeal filed on 18.12.2025 was dismissed solely on limitation without examining the merits. The petitioner also pointed to garnishee proceedings for FY 2023-24 to FY 2025-26 although the appellate order related to FY 2020-21.
Procedural History
The writ petition challenged the appellate order dismissing the appeal as time-barred.
Legal Issues
- Validity of dismissal of the appeal on limitation under Section 107.
- Effect of the alleged non-service of the show cause notice.
- Recovery proceedings after payment of the pre-deposit under Section 107(6) and Section 107(7).
Relevant Statutory Provisions
- Section 107, including sub-sections (6) and (7), West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act.
- Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Parties’ Submissions
Petitioner
The petitioner contended that the show cause notice was uploaded only under the “Additional notice and orders” tab, preventing a reply, and that the appeal was dismissed on limitation without considering the merits. Reliance was placed on Section 107(7), contending that recovery proceedings are deemed to be stayed once the amount under Section 107(6) has been paid.
State
The State submitted that adequate opportunities had been granted, the petitioner had failed to satisfactorily explain the delay in filing the appeal, and the appellate order was legally sustainable.
Court’s Findings and Reasoning
The Court observed that the show cause notice had been uploaded only under the “Additional notice and orders” tab, preventing the petitioner from responding and constituting a violation of the principles of natural justice. It also noted a material discrepancy, as the appellate order related to FY 2020-21 while recovery/garnishee proceedings had been initiated for FY 2023-24 to FY 2025-26.
The Court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case warranting interference and that the reasons for delay stated in paragraphs 11 and 12 of the writ petition were sufficiently explained and should be considered while deciding the appeal on merits.
Final Ruling
The Calcutta High Court quashed and set aside the appellate order. It directed the appellate authority to entertain the appeal and decide it on merits in accordance with law on or before 30.09.2026. Since the petitioner had already made the required pre-deposit, no further deposit was required. All issues were left open for decision on merits, and the Court stated that the recovery proceedings would not be influenced by its order.
Appellant was represented by: Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray and Ms. Shiwani Shaw
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the record.
2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging inter alia, the legality and validity of the appellate order 28th January, 2026 passed by the respondent no.3 under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act(hereinafter referred to as the said WBGST Act’) and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(hereinafter referred to as the said `CGST Act’) whereby the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground of limitation.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits as follows:
i. That a notice in Form GST DRC-01 bearing reference No.ZD90924039975M dated 26.09.2024 has been issued to the petitioner for the period March 21 to April 22 demanding tax interest penalty.
ii. That the said notice has been uploaded on the GST portal under the “tab Additional notice and orders.” As a result of which the petitioner could not respond to the show cause notice.
iii. That the petitioner came to know the order of adjudication dated 3.7.25 only upon receiving a recovery email dated 19.11.2025.
iv. That prior to the issuance of the adjudication order an amount of Rs. 2,33,254/- has been recovered from the electronic credit ledger on 12.3.25. A further amount of Rs. 3,75,830/ -has also been recovered on 23.02.2026. In total, 46% of the disputed demand of Rs. 13,13,468/- has already been recovered.
v. That being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 18.12.25. However the same has been dismissed by the appellate order on 28.1.26 solely on the ground of limitation, without going into merit of the case.
vi. That from annexure P13 at page 114, it appears that garnishee proceedings have been initiated for the period 2023-24 to 2025-26 whereas the appellate order relates to Financial Year 2020-21. This shows non application of mind of the respondent authorities.
4. The petitioner places reliance upon Section 107 sub section 7 of the said act, since it has been contemplated that in cases the appellant has paid the amount under sub section 6 of section 107, the recovery proceedings shall be deemed to be stayed.
5. Learned counsel for the State respondent vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that:
i. Ample opportunities have been granted to the petitioner to substantiate their case before the appellate authority.
ii. The petitioner has failed to make out a proper case and did not give any proper explanation for the delay in filing the appeal.
iii. The appellate order does not suffer from any infirmity and is sustainable in the eye law.
6. Having heard the parties and upon perusing the records this court observes;
i. That the show cause notice has been only uploaded under the ‘tab Additional notice and orders’ therefore could not reply to the same, which constitutes a violation of principles of natural justice.
ii. This court further notes a material discrepancies. The appellate order relates to Financial Year 2020-21 whereas recovery/garnishee proceedings have been initiated for Financial Year 2023-24 to 2025-26.
7. This court of the view that the petitioner is able to make out a prima facie case warranting an interference. In the interest of justice, the petitioner shall be given a further opportunity.
8. This court finds that the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal have been sufficiently explained by the petitioner in paragraph no.11 and 12 of the writ petition. Such reasons are of paramount importance and should be considered by the appellate authority while deciding the case on merits.
9. In view of the above, the appellate order is accordingly quashed and set aside with the following directions:
i.The appellate authority shall entertain the appeal and decide the same on merits in accordance with law.
ii. The entire excise of adjudication shall be concluded on or before 30th September, 2026. The petitioner shall cooperate and shall not seek any further adjournment.
10. Since the petitioner has already made the pre-deposit for preferring the appeal, no further deposit is required to be paid for expeditious hearing of the matter.
11. All points are left open for the appellate authority to decide on merits. The recovery proceedings shall be not be influenced by this order.
12. With the above observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of.
13. Since no affidavit in opposition has been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied and not admitted.
14. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
Author Bio
