Case Law Details
Keysight Technologies India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (Calcutta High Court)
In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta took a stern stance against an adjudicating authority for failing to adhere to the directions of a senior officer. The court strongly disapproved of the adjudicating officer’s actions, citing a lack of judicial discipline and emphasizing the potential consequences of such behavior in government offices.
The case revolved around a petitioner, an exporter, who had filed a claim for the refund of input tax credit. After the claim was initially rejected, the petitioner filed an appeal. The appellate authority, upon reviewing the case, allowed the appeal on its merits and remanded the matter back to the original authority with a specific directive to issue a detailed and reasoned order. However, the original authority rejected the claim once again, arguing that the appellate authority did not possess the power of ‘remand’ under Section 107(7) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act. The original authority contended that the appellate authority should have passed the order themselves, leading to the filing of a writ petition by the petitioner.
Detailed Analysis
The Calcutta High Court’s judgment strongly criticized the adjudicating authority’s actions. It noted that the Adjudicating Authority had passed the impugned order on remand from a higher authority in direct violation of the higher Appellate Authority’s specific directive. Such conduct, the court emphasized, was unacceptable, as the Adjudicating Authority, being subordinate to the Appellate Authority, was legally bound to comply with the higher authority’s orders.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
