Shri Ambika Metaliks Pvt. Ltd vs The Commercial Tax Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 1468 Cal

24.3.2022
   ks                     WPA 4895 of 2022
 sl. 12
                  Shri Ambika Metaliks Pvt. Ltd.
                              Vs
            The Commercial Tax Officer, Fairley Charge & Ors.

            Mr. Anil Dugar,
            Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee
                          ... For the Petitioners.
            Mr. A. Roy, Ld. GP
            Mr. T.M. Siddiqui,
            Mr. Debasish Ghosh
                          ... For the State.


              Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

              In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the

            impugned judgment dated 19th February, 2018 passed

            by the West Bengal Commercial Taxes and Revisional

            Board on the ground that the aforesaid impugned

            order was passed without giving any opportunity of

            hearing to the petitioner and that the aforesaid

            judgment dated 19th February, 2018 was served upon

            him on 29th January, 2022 and as such the same is

            barred by limitation.   When petitioner was asked to

            indicate any statutory provision under which such

            impugned judgment is barred, he could not show from

            the statute any such provision with regard to the

            limitation. Secondly, the allegation of the petitioner of

            not providing an opportunity of hearing also is

            incorrect statement as appears from the perusal of the

            impugned judgment where it has been recorded and

            the relevant portion of such recording is as hereunder:
                            2




    "The petitioner was directed to produce all the
documents in support of his ground of revision. Ld.
D.R. is directed to examine the documents produced
by Ld Adv.
    The final hearing was refixed on 19-02-2018. On
19-02-2018

none appears for the petitioner. Ld. D.R. submits that none appeared with relevant documents before him for examination of documents. As several opportunities is allowed to the petitioner no more opportunity is allowable. So the matter is decided ex parte today.

As the dealer failed to produce any documents in support of his ground of revision I did not interfer the decision of Ld audit cum assessment authority and appellate authority.

I have heard arguments of both sides, and have perused connected case records, after which I proceed to pass my order. It is, therefore,".

Considering the submission of the parties and

admitted facts as appears from the impugned

judgment, I am not inclined to entertain this writ

petition, being WPA 4895 of 2022 and the same is,

accordingly, dismissed.

( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )