Tag: Calcutta HC

ArticleGST Article

Alternative Remedy before GSTAT to be Exhausted Despite Allegation that Adjudication Travelled Beyond SCN

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta in the case of RSH Amit Realty Development LLP &Anr. v. The Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Ballygunge Charge & Ors. [WPA 29673 of 2025 order dated April 27, 2026] held that where the assessee had already availed the appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act and a further statutory remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal (“GSTAT”) remained available

ArticleGST Article

Summary DRC-01 SCN and DRC-07 order without facts/ reasons held to be violative Section 75(6) of CGST Act

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of M/s. Duttcon Consultant and Engineers Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Shyambazar Charge & Ors. [WPA No. 24188 of 2025, order dated December 09, 2025] held summary Form GST DRC-01 show cause notice and DRC-07 adjudication order bereft of relevant facts/reasons violate mandatory Section 75(6) WBGST/CGST Act requirement for quasi-judicial orders, “additional notices and orders” portal tab upload improper service per precedents, no opportunity of hearing under Section 75(4) despite adverse decision are liable to be set aside.

ArticleGST Article

Calcutta HC upholds CESTAT’s decision of setting aside of demand of interest on revenue-neutral

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur Commissionerate v. M/s Steel Authority of India Limited held that no substantial question of law arises from the Tribunal’s order which, on finding the situation revenue-neutral, set aside demand of interest  and consequently declined to interfere with the Tribunal’s decision.

ArticleGST Article

Review Petition by Revenue dismissed against earlier Order Quashing GST Demand on Breach of Natural Justice

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of The Assistant Commissioner of West Bengal State Tax, Cooch Behar Charge & Ors. held that the Revenue’s review petition against the earlier judgment quashing the demand for violation of principles of natural justice was not maintainable, as no error apparent on the face of the record, no discovery of new evidence, and no other statutory ground for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 were made out.

ArticleGST Article

ITC can’t be denied if disclosed in GSTR-9 but missed in GSTR-3B due to inadvertent error

byCA Bimal Jain

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Laxmi Ghosh held that the Appellate Authority failed to provide reasons for rejecting the Petitioner’s claim to set off IGST Input Tax Credit declared in the annual return GSTR-9 against the tax demand when the same was inadvertently missed in the monthly returns GSTR-3B, and set aside the Appellate Authority’s order for non-consideration of the ITC claimed in GSTR-9 and inadequate reasoning, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication.