The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the matter of M/s Usha Gupta v. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax [WPA 17530 OF 2022 dated August 10, 2022] has set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the revenue department on the ground that the order passed against the assessee is one-line order dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay in submission without even supporting detailed reasons.
M/s Usha Gupta (“the Petitioner”) has challenged the order dated July 28, 2022 (“the Impugned order”) passed by the revenue department (“the Respondent”) on the ground that the adjudication summary does not contain any reason and specific allegation and no full text of the order along with summary order was furnished to the Petitioner at any point of time and also the Impugned order of the Respondent is a one-line order dismissing the appeal of the Petitioner on the ground of delay in submission of the appeal in question.
- In support of its contention of delay in filing the appeal, the summary order came to the knowledge of the Petitioner, only when its bank account was debited.
- The delay in filing the appeal in question, it was submitted that it is protected by the order of the Supreme Court on major part of the delay which occurred during the Covid-19.
- Whether the one- line Impugned order passed by the Respondent dismissing the appeal of the Petitioner on the ground of delay in submission was valid?
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in [WPA 17530 OF 2022 dated August 10, 2022] has held as under:
- The summary order is one-line order without containing any detailed supporting reason and that the order of the Respondent is also one-line order dismissing the appeal of the Petitioner on the ground of delay in filing the appeal without going into the merit of the appeal.
- Dispose of this writ petition by setting aside the Impugned order and remanding the matter back to the Respondent concerned to pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law on merit of the said appeal without insisting on the issue of limitation, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to the P
- It is needless to mention that at the time of disposal of the appeal in question, the Petitioner or its authorized representative shall be given opportunity of personal hearing. Further the Petitioner is granted by the liberty to make appropriate application in accordance with law for refund of the amount which has been collected in excess of the pre-deposit, before the authority concerned which shall be considered by them in accordance with law.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.
Live GST Course on:
Scrutiny Notices, Assessment, Audit, Inspection, Search, Seizure and Arrest under GST by CA. Bimal Jain
3 Day | 3 Session | 9 Hours
September 03 | 3:00 – 6:00 PM, September 04, September 11 | 10:00 AM – 1:00 PM (IST)
2,999/- (Inclusive of GST)
Register Now !!
For details, or any queries,