Case Law Details
Shantanu Dey Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Calcutta High Court)
In the case of Shantanu Dey Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, the Calcutta High Court addressed the appellant’s challenge against the cancellation of his GST registration. The appellant’s registration was annulled because he failed to comply with the provisions of Section 28(1) of the WBGST Act, 2017, and Rule 19(1) of the WBGST Rules, 2017, which mandate notifying the authorities of any change in the place of business. Despite this non-compliance, the Court, considering the appellant’s longstanding registration, granted him one final opportunity. The Court directed the appellant to submit the necessary application and documentation to the original authority within three weeks. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Serampore Charge, was instructed to review and decide on the application on its merits, without being influenced by previous orders. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements under the GST law while also showing the Court’s willingness to offer a last chance for rectification.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. The appellant has filed this appeal challenging an order passed by the learned Single Bench dated 2nd April, 2024 in W.P.A. 7480 of 2024 declining to grant any interim order and direction has been issued to file the affidavits.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates on either side, the writ petition and this appeal are taken up together and are disposed of by this common judgment and order.
3. The appellant challenged the order passed by the appellate authority affirming the order passed by the original authority cancelling the appellant’s registration under the GST Act on the ground that the appellant was not carrying on business in the place mentioned in the registration certificate.
4. The appellate authority in the order has referred to the provisions of section 28(1) of the WBGST Act, 2017 as well as Rule 19(1) of the WBGST Rules 2017 and set out the procedure, which has to be followed by the registered taxpayer in the event of change of place of business or an additional place of business.
5. Admittedly, the appellant did not comply with the said procedure. Considering the fact that the registration of the appellant was granted several years back, this Court is of the view that one more opportunity can be granted to the appellant to go before the original authority viz., the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Government of West Bengal, Serampore Charge and file the appropriate application in the appropriate form along with all supportive documents. If the same is filed, the original authority viz., the Assistant Commissioner shall consider the said application and decide the same on merits uninfluenced by any observation made by the appellate authority in the earlier order.
6. The above directions be complied with within a period of three weeks from the date on which the application is filed in full form.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the appeal and the connected application are disposed of.
8. No costs.
Author Bio
