Arup Saha vs Assistant Commissioner Of Cgst & ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2990 Cal

19.5.2022
   ks                        WPA 7879 of 2022
 sl. 5
                            Arup Saha
                                 Vs
            Assistant Commissioner of CGST & CX, B.B.D. Bag II
            Division, Kolkata North Commissionerate & Ors.

            Mr. Sandip Choraria,
            Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee
                         ... For the Petitioner.
            Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee,
            Mr. Abhradip Maity
                         ... For the Respondent CGST & CX.

Mr. Partha Chakraborty ... For the UOI.

Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

In this writ petition, petitiner has challenged the

impugned order dated January 3, 2022 passed by the

respondent CGST Authority rejecting the claim for

refund to the petitioner on the ground of limitation.

Learned Advocte for the petitioner submits that the

impugned order of rejection is bad in law. In support

of his contention, heas has relied upon an unreported

decision of the Bombay High Court dated January 10,

2022 pased in Writ Petition(L) No.1275 of 2021(Saiher

Supply Chain Consulting Pvt. Ltd. vs The Union of

India & Anr.) and also an unreported decision of the

Madras High Court dated September, 28, 2021 passed

in WP No.18156 of 2021 & WMP Nos. 19386 & 19389

of 21(M/s. GNC Infra LLP vs. Assistant

Commissioner(Circle) Ekkatuthangal, Commercial Tax

Department) and also my order dated Februrary 2,

2022 passed in WPA No.950 of 2022 (Imran Javed v.

Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ballygunge Charge

& Ors.).

Learned Advocate appearing for the respondents

opposing the writ petition submits that the application

for refund in question was made by the petitioner after

the expiry of two years from the relevant date and the

petitioner had not made any prayer for extension of

the time limit or for condonatin of such delay in filing

the application for refund.

Considering the submission of the parties, this writ

petition being WPA 7879 of 2022 is disposed of by

setting aside the impugned order dated January 3,

2022 with a direction upon the first respondent

concerned to consider the petitioner's application in

question afresh on merits, and not on the point of

limitation, and in accordance with law and considering

the referred judgments, and to pass a reasoned and

speaking order within eight weeks from the date of

communication of this order.

( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )