Case Law Details
Prabhu Dayal Jajoo Vs Deputy Commissioner, State Tax (Calcutta High Court)
Calcutta High Court in the case of Prabhu Dayal Jajoo vs Deputy Commissioner, State Tax allows filing of GST appeal after limitation period, considering recovery of certain sums of money from electronic cash ledger.
The appeals in question were filed against the order passed in the writ petition, which was dismissed by the learned Single Bench. The orders under scrutiny were issued under Section 74 of the WBGST Act, 2017. Despite the appeal being filed beyond the limitation period, the court acknowledged that the order was appealable. However, the court declined to interfere, citing the delay in filing the writ petition and suggested availing the statutory remedy available under the Act. The primary ground for challenging the order was the alleged violation of the principles of natural justice.
The appellant argued that they had no knowledge of the show cause notice, as it was uploaded on a different portal and lacked essential particulars. The initiation of proceedings, according to the appellant, was not in accordance with the law. It is worth noting that although the impugned orders were passed in March 2022, the notices for recovery were issued only in March 2023.
The State’s counsel contended that all the necessary information was provided to the assessee, contradicting the appellant’s submission.
Considering the unique circumstances of the case, the court granted liberty to the appellant to file a statutory appeal, particularly in light of the department’s recovery of certain sums of money from the electronic cash ledger.
Conclusion: In conclusion, the Calcutta High Court’s judgment/order allows the appellant to file a statutory appeal within 15 days from the receipt of the server copy of the order. The appeals will be entertained without rejection on the grounds of limitation if filed within the stipulated period. The pre-deposit amounts required by the appellant will be adjusted from the funds already recovered from the electronic cash ledger. The remaining balance recovered from the appellant will be subject to the orders passed by the appellate authority in the appeal. Furthermore, the court directed the lifting of the attachment on the appellant’s bank account if the statutory appeal is filed within the specified time frame. The appellant retains the right to raise all grounds raised in the writ petition during the appeal process.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. We have heard the learned advocates for either of the parties.
2. These appeals have been filed against the order passed in the writ petition which were dismissed by the learned Single Bench.
3. The orders impugned in the writ petition were the orders passed under Section 74 of the WBGST Act, 2017.
4. Admittedly, the said order is an appealable order and the Court also taking note of the fact that the writ petition was preferred much after the period of limitation for filing the appeal that too beyond the condonable period declined to interfere with the order passed under Section 74 of the Act. While dismissing the writ petition, the learned Writ Court has held that it will be open to the appellant to avail the statutory remedy available under the Act. The main ground on which the order passed under Section 74 of the Act was on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
5. According to the appellant, the show cause notice was uploaded in a different portal and the appellant had no knowledge of the same. That apart, the show cause notice also bereft of the particulars and therefore, it is submitted that the very initiation of proceedings itself is not in accordance with law.
Though the orders which were impugned in the writ petition was passed in March, 2022, the notices for recovery were issued only in the year March, 2023.
6. Mr. T.M. Siddique, learned counsel appearing for the State would vehemently contend that the submission made by the learned advocate for the appellant is incorrect and all information was provided to the assessee.
7. Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that liberty can be granted to the appellant to file a statutory appeal, more so when certain sums of money have already been recovered by the department from the electronic cash ledger.
8. In the result the appeals are disposed of by directing the appellant to file a statutory appeal before the first appellate authority and if the same is filed within a period of 15 days’ from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order, the appeals shall be entertained without rejecting the same on the ground of limitation. The pre-deposit amounts which the appellant have to make shall be adjusted from and out of the amount already recovered from the appellant by way of recovery from the electronic cash ledger, the balance amount which was recovered from the appellant shall abide by the orders that may be passed by the appellate authority in the appeal to be filed by the appellant in terms of the above direction. If the appellant files a statutory appeal within the period stipulated by this order, the attachment of the appellant’s bank account shall be lifted.
9. Needless to state that the appellant would be entitled to canvass all the grounds which have been raised in the writ petition.
Author Bio
