Goutam Kundu vs Union Of India & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 8640 Cal

Item No.2.
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                             APPELLATE SIDE


                            HEARD ON: 22.12.2022

                         DELIVERED ON:22.12.2022

                                  CORAM:

               THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
                                      AND
         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
                           M.A.T No.1935 of 2022
                                    with
                           I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2022

                              Goutam Kundu.
                                     Vs.
                            Union of India & Ors.


Appearance:-
Ms. Sweta Mukherjee,
Mr. Arup Sarkar                  ...                  for the appellant.

Mr. Shaunak Ghosh                ....                 for the Union of India.

Mr. Kaushik Dey,
Ms. Ekta Sinha                   ...                  for the respondents.


                                JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)

1. This intra-Court appeal by the writ petitioner is directed

against the order dated 29th November, 2022 in W.P.A. 25040 of

2022 by which the learned Single Bench did not grant any interim

order. The writ petition was filed by the appellant challenging

the cancellation of the registration under the provisions of the

CGST Act, 2017 dated 28th May, 2019 and the order passed by the

Joint Commissioner (Appeals) dated 9th November, 2022 rejecting

the appeal as time-barred. Aggrieved by the direction of the

learned Writ Court only to file affidavit-in-opposition without

granting an interim order, the appellant is before us by way of

filing this appeal.

2. We have heard Ms. Sweta Mukherjee, learned Advocate

appearing for the appellant and Mr. Kaushik Dey, learned senior

standing counsel for the respondents.

3. After elaborately hearing the learned Advocates for the

parties, we are of the view that the conduct of the dealer

initially in not filing the returns cannot be appreciated but,

however, Ms. Sweta Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the

appellant, submits that her client had filed few of the returns

and her client is ready and willing to file the remaining

returns after complying with all the formalities under the Act

and one opportunity may be granted to the appellant to

regularise the mistake, which had been committed.

4. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the

case, we are of the view that the registration should be allowed

to be restored and the appellant should be permitted to file his

returns. Otherwise it is not only the appellant would be

affected but the interest of the revenue also would get

affected. For such reason, we are inclined to grant the

following reliefs.

5. This appeal and connected application along with the writ

petition stand disposed of by granting 30 days' time from the

date of receipt of the server copy of this order to the

appellant to file all the pending returns after complying with

all the legal formalities required to be complied with under the

Act and if the same is done, the authority concerned shall

restore the registration of the appellant.

6. This order has been passed considering the peculiar facts

and circumstances of the case and shall not be treated as a

precedent. Needless to state that if any dues are payable by

the appellant, they also have to be cleared by the appellant to

enable the registration to be restored.

7. There shall be no order as to costs.

8. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance

of all legal formalities.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J)

I agree,

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

NAREN/PALLAB(AR.C)