Allowed

Samir Sadhukhan v. Assistant Commissioner of Cgst and Cx Shyambazar Division Kolkata and Ors.

Calcutta HC16 Jul 2024FMA/509/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an intra-court appeal by granting liberty to the appellant to file a statutory appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The court directed that the appeal be entertained without reference to limitation if filed within three weeks and upon compliance of pre-deposit conditions, even though the adjudication order was never formally served.

What did the court decide?

Appellant was granted liberty to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) within three weeks, which shall be entertained without reference to limitation upon compliance of pre-deposit conditio

Samir Sadhukhan Vs Assistant Commissioner of Cgst and… — GST and Indirect Tax | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

Form No. J.(2) Item No.5

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

HEARD ON: 16.07.2024 DELIVERED ON: 16.07.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

¶7

F.M.A. 509 of 2024 With IA No. CAN 1 of 2024 Samir Sadhukhan Versus

¶8

Assistant Commissioner of CGST & CX, Shyambazar Division, Kolkata North Commissionerate & Ors.

¶9

Appearance:Mr. Sandip Choraria Mr. Akshat Agarwal Mr. K. K. Maiti Mr. Saurov Mallick Mr. Abhradip Maiti Mr. Om Narayan Rai

¶10

..…For the Appellant …..For the CGST Authority …..For the Union of India

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.)

¶13

In this intra-Court appeal filed by the writ petitioner is directed against the order dated 3^rd January, 2024 in W.P.A. No.28381 of 2023 dismissing the writ petition, which was filed challenging the recovery notices dated 15^th September, 2023 and 16^th October, 2023, arising out of an order of adjudication dated 22^nd March, 2023.

¶14

The appellant would point out that the show-cause cum demand notice dated 24^th December, 2020 was received by the appellant and the reply was also submitted on 25^th March, 2021. However, the adjudication order was not served on the appellant and he came to know of it only when the recovery notices were issued.

¶15

In the writ petition, the learned Single Bench pointed out that the adjudication order was despatched to the very same address to which the show-cause cum demand

¶16

¶17

notice was served as well as the recovery notices were served. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed.

¶18

Before us, the learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the appellant’s right of filing a statutory appeal may not be curtailed and an opportunity may be granted to the appellant to file an appeal.

¶19

Thus, without going into the controversy as to whether the adjudication order dated 22^nd March, 2023 was served on the appellant, we propose to give liberty to the appellant to prefer an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) – I, G.S.T. Bhawan, Kolkata and the appellant will be permitted to file the appeal with the photostat copy of the adjudication order dated 22^nd March, 2023, which was handed over to the appellant when the writ petition was heard.

¶20

With these above observations/directions, appeal and the connected application (IA No. CAN 1 of 2024) stand disposed of by giving liberty to the appellant to file an appeal against the adjudication order dated 22^nd March, 2023 before the appropriate appellate authority by enclosing the photostat copy of the adjudication order and if such appeal is filed within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of server copy of this order and upon compliance of the pre-deposit conditions, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal without reference to limitation, hear the parties and take a decision on merits and in accordance with law.

¶21

No costs.

¶22

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.

¶23

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶24

I agree.

¶25

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

¶26

Pallab/Krishnendu AR(Ct.)

Samir Sadhukhan v. Assistant Commissioner of Cgst and Cx Shyambazar Division Kolkata and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samir Sadhukhan v. Assistant Commissioner of Cgst and Cx Shyambazar Division Kolkata and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata Vs M/S. Wadhwani Commodities Trading Represented by Its Proprietor Mr. Chandra Prakash Wadhwani

Commissioner of Customs (Port) ,Kolkata Vs Shri Mahendra Kumar Modi Proprietor of M/S. Bajrang Expo

Commissioner of Custom (Port) Kolkata Vs Chandra Prakash Wadhwani Proprietor of M/S. Wadhwani Commodities Trading

Askar Ali Vs Surendra Kr. Meena

Sukhada Tudu Vs Union of India and Ors.

Giyasuddin Molla Vs the Asst Commr of Cgst and Central Execise, Budge Budge Div, Kolkata South Commissionerate and Ors.