2025 (6) TMI 1001 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - adjudicating authority did not consider the submissions and the relevant judgments relied upon by the petitioner - appealable order under the provisions of Section 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act 2017 or not - HELD THAT - Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and noting that an appellate remedy having been provided the petitioner having failed to take benefit of such appellate remedy there being no appropriate explanation in approaching this Court belatedly and the only explanation being the pendency of an arbitral proceedings the petitioner has not been able to justify or provide appropriate explanation for the delay in approaching this Court. On such ground ordinarily there is no scope to entertain the present writ petition. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the appellate authority in accordance with law and if an appeal is filed within a period of four weeks from date along with an application for condonation of delay the appellate authority having regard to the observations made hereinabove and upon considering the explanation for the delay shall hear out and dispose of the appeal on merits subject to compliance of other formalities by the petitioner. Petition disposed off.

Summary

The Calcutta High Court, presided by Raja Basu Chowdhury, J., dismissed the writ petition challenging the order dated 27th February 2023 passed by respondent no.1 under the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the order was "without jurisdiction" and failed to consider relevant submissions and judgments. However, the Court emphasized that since an appellate remedy exists under Section 107 of the said Act, and the petitioner had not availed it timely without sufficient explanation-other than pending arbitral proceedings-the writ petition could not be entertained on grounds of delay.The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within four weeks, along with an application for condonation of delay. It directed the appellate authority to "hear out and dispose of the appeal on merits," considering the explanation for delay and subject to compliance with formalities. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.