Case Law Details
Deputy Commissioner Vs Nidhi Madhogaria (Calcutta High Court)
In this matters the petitioner filed two writ petitions before the Hon’ble Single Judge of Calcutta High Court by challenging the impugned detention orders passed U/s. 129 by the WBGST authority. The petitioner came before Calcutta High Court after exhausting appellate forum. At the time of appeal the petitioner paid 10% pre deposit in terms of Section 107(6)(b) of WBGST Act on disputed demand and since no GST tribunal is available therefore the petitioner had only option to challenge the impugned appeal order before Calcutta High Court.
At the time of hearing before Hon’ble Single Judge of Calcutta High Court, the petitioner submitted that if there is a GST Tribunal, in that case the disputed demand will be stayed subject to a payment of further 20% on the balance disputed demand in terms of Section 112(8) of WBGST Act.
Upon considering the same the Hon’ble Single Judge of Calcutta High Court was pleased to pass an order by directing the petitioner to pay further 20% on the balance disputed demand and upon such payment the respondent authorities shall release the goods in question, as an interim relief.
Thereafter direction for filing affidavit in opposition and affidavit in reply was made. The petitioner paid the same amount and communicated the same with the concerned respondent authorities. After doing all formalities the respondent authority did not release the goods in question and filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. Single Judge before the Hon’ble Division Bench.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
