Stay updated
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Baazar Style Retail Ltd. set aside the order and notice issued by the State GST Department when proceedings have already been initiated by the Central GST Department by relying upon the provision of Section 6(2)(b) of the WBGST Act.
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, in the case of Messers Sreema Rice Mill held that proceedings are not invalid if the SCN is not uploaded on the common portal and served by other means specified in Section 169 of the CGST Act. However, the adjudication order must be uploaded on the common portal to allow the Assessee to file an appeal. Hence, the writ petition was disposed of.
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, in the case of M/s. East India Shipping Agency directed the Department to allow filing of the appeal filed for the part period, stating that the Department should allow filing of appeal for the disputed part period which could not be accepted due to technical issue on GST portal.
Statutory right of appeal can’t be defeated by reason of technical glitches
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, in the case of M/s Utpal Das v. State of West Bengal [Writ Petition No. 18241 of 2022 dated July 18, 2024] quashed the Orders of the proper officer and the Appellate Authority, where the Assessee claimed excess ITC due to clerical mistake but voluntarily debited its electronic credit ledger by filing Form GST DRC-03 to reverse ITC, interest could not be levied on Assessee.
Yes, the Honorable High Court of Calcutta in the case of Limton Metals Ltd. dismissed the writ petition challenging orders for cancellation of registration. The petitioner argued that the notice did not comply with section 29 provisions, as it did not specify the reasons for the cancellation and the notice mentioned “Others” under the reasons column, which the petitioner claimed was insufficient disclosure.
Stay Yourself Updated on GST Adverse order can’t be passed without hearing assessee even if he didn’t file his response to SCN: HC THE HON’BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BASANTA KUMAR SHAW V/s ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE…
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Sarkar Diesel held that the advance ruling passed by the authority of one particular state is not binding on the department of different state and third-party taxpayer.
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri) in M/s Maa Amba Builders set aside the order of detention and held that there was no material record available, therefore, no presumption can be drawn that there was the intention of the tax evasion. Taking into the consideration, within 24 hrs from the expiry of the validity of the e-way bill, there was material to show that was involved in the tax evasion.
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Acme Paints and Resin (P.) Ltd. held that since the Assessee had deposited pre-deposit amount and there was no lack of bona fide on part of the Assessee, explanation given by the Assessee that delay in filing appeal was due to an oversight by accountant, though not entirely adequate, was accepted in interest of justice.