2025 (4) TMI 94 - HC - GST

Challenge to order affirming the adjudication order passed by the Deputy Commissioner for the period from April 1 2018 to March 31 2019 - HELD THAT - Despite show-cause notice being issued by the adjudicating authority the appellant did not submit a reply nor did he participate in the adjudication process which ultimately culminated in an order under section 73(9) of the WBGST Act 2017(for brevity the Act .) However the appellant appears to have been diligent enough to file an appeal before the appellate authority within the condonable period of limitation. However in spite of three adjournments the appellant/assessee did not appear before the appellate authority which led to dismissal of the appeal. In terms of sub-section (12) of section 107 of the Act the appellate authority is expected to pass a reasoned order. However on perusal of the appellate authority s order there is no reason and the appeal has been rejected since no application for adjournment was submitted and no further adjournment can be allowed. The grounds which have been canvassed in the appeal petition have not been adverted to. The matter has to be decided afresh by the appellate authority after giving one more opportunity to the appellant and thereafter to pass a speaking order - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

The Calcutta High Court, presided by Chief Justice T. S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee, addressed an intra-Court appeal against an order dated February 10, 2025, which dismissed the appellant's writ petition. The appellant challenged an order by the Additional Commissioner of Revenue affirming a previous adjudication by the Deputy Commissioner for the period April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019.The appellant failed to respond to a show-cause notice or participate in the adjudication process, leading to an order under section 73(9) of the WBGST Act, 2017. Although the appellant filed an appeal within the permissible period, they did not appear before the appellate authority, resulting in the appeal's dismissal. The appellate authority's order lacked reasoning, as required by section 107(12) of the Act, and did not address the grounds presented in the appeal petition.The Court concluded that the appellate authority should reconsider the matter, providing the appellant another opportunity to present their case. The Court set aside both the writ petition order and the appellate authority's order dated November 22, 2024, remanding the case for fresh consideration. The appellate authority is instructed to schedule a personal hearing, during which the appellant must appear without seeking adjournments and may submit written submissions. A "speaking order" must be issued, considering all documents and in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded, and an urgent certified copy of the order can be furnished upon compliance with legal formalities.