Partly allowed

Omkar Ceramic v. Commissioner of State Tax

Patna HC10 Dec 2020CWJC/21430/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Patna quashed an order dismissing a GST appeal in limine due to delay, accepting the explanation of non-preparation of certified copies. The petition was disposed of with directives to the appellate authority to fix a hearing date, allow additional material, and decide the limitation issue afresh.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order dismissing the appeal in limine. Directed the appellate authority to decide the limitation issue afresh and conclude the matter by 31.03.2021.

Omkar Ceramic Vs Commissioner of State Tax — GST and Indirect Tax | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21430 of 2019

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Omkar Ceramic, a Partnership firm having its office at 70 Ft. IOC Road, Bye Pass, Patna through its partner Dipikaben Milan Varani aged about 31 years Female wife of Milan Kanjgibhai Virani resident of 293, Mahavir Nagar Society, Yogi Chok, Punagam, Choryasi, Bombay Market, Surat, Gujrat at present residing at A/301, Kashyap Suman Place, Main Road, RMS Colony, P.O. and P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

Commissioner of State Tax Having its office at Vikas Bhawan Patna.

¶7

Addl. Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), West Division, Patna.

¶8

Joint Commissioner of State Tax Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna.

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.D.V.Pathy, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Viksh Kumar, SC 11.

¶12

======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶14

and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶15

Date : 10-12-2020

¶16

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

¶17

i) the show cause notice dated 21.01.2019 (as contained in Annexure 2) issued by the respondent No. 3 under section 74 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the period 2017-18 be quashed.

¶18

ii) the order dated 11.03.2019 (as contained in Annexure-3 Series) passed by the respondent no. 3 under Section 74(9) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the period 2018-19 be quashed.

¶19

iii) the order dated 20.08.2019 (as contained in Annexure-4) passed by the respondent no. 2

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.21430 of 2019 dt.10-12-2020 2/3

¶21

dismissing the appeal in limine on the solitary ground of delay in filing of the appeal be quashed.

¶22

iv) the notice of demand dated 14.03.2019 (as contained in Annexure-3 series) issued by the respondent no. 3 be quashed.

¶23

v) for granting any other relief(s) to which the petitioner is otherwise found entitled to.”

¶24

For the reasons emanating from the record, more so, the delay having explained on account of non-preparation of the certified copy, we quash and set aside the impugned order dated 14.03.2019 passed by respondent no. 3, namely, Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna, with further following directions:-

¶25

(i) The petitioner shall approach before the appellate authority on 28.12.2020, when a date shall be fixed for further hearing of the matter, which stands restored to its original number and status.

¶26

(ii) The parties shall be afforded opportunity of filing additional material in support of their contentions, which they shall positively do so within two weeks.

¶27

(iii) The appropriate authority shall decide the issue of limitation afresh and if the appeal is found to be within the prescribed period of limitation, the main appeal itself shall be heard, considered and decided within a period of two months

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.21430 of 2019 dt.10-12-2020 3/3

¶29

thereafter, i.e. on or before 31^st March, 2021.

¶30

(iv) The petitioner through learned counsel, undertakes to fully co-operate and not take unnecessary adjournment;

¶31

(v) All quests are left open to be adjudicated by the authority below.

¶32

(vi) Liberty is reserved to either of the parties to approach the court assailing the order, if so required and desired.

¶33

Petition stands disposed of.

¶34

Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand

¶35

disposed of.

¶36

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

¶37

( Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶38

sujit/-

¶39

AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 14.12.2020 Transmission Date

Omkar Ceramic v. Commissioner of State Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omkar Ceramic v. Commissioner of State Tax

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

Dayanand Ayurvedic Medical College and Hospital Vs The Union of India

The State Of Bihar and Ors. Vs Rajiv Nandan Maurya and Ors.

Jai Mata Dee Construction Vs Commissioner of State Tax