Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7746 Cal
Judgement Date : 22 November, 2022
Item no. 19
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam
And
The Hon'ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
FMA 167 of 2022
with
IA No.: CAN 1 of 2022
.Frost International Limited & Anr
vs.
Deputy Commissioner, Central Audit Unit & Ors.
Appearance:
For the Appellant : Mrs. Rita Mukherjee
Mr. Abhijit Das
For the Respondents : Mr. A. Ray, Ld. G.P.
Mr. T.M. Siddiqui Mr. D. Ghosh Mr. D. Sahu
Heard on : 22.11.2022
Judgment on : 22.11.2022
T.S. Sivagnanam J.:
This intra-Court appeal filed by the writ petitioners is
directed against the order dated 9 th July, 2022 passed in WP No.30617
(W) of 2017. The said writ petition was filed by the appellants
challenging the order passed by the Fast Track Revisional Authority,
Commercial Taxes, West Bengal dated 10 th November, 2016 in the
revision case filed by the appellant being Revision Case No. Rev-629/FT-
1/15-16. The order passed by the Revisional Authority is an ex parte
order which was questioned in the writ petition. However, the learned
Single Bench was not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the
Fast Track Revisional Authority. Aggrieved by the same the appellants
are before us by way of appeal.
We have heard the learned advocates for the parties at length.
It could be seen that the revision petition was filed under the
provisions of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on 18 th March, 2014
challenging the order passed by the Senior Joint Commissioner, Kolkata
South Circle dated 31 st January, 2014. Nearly after elapse of two years
from the date of filing the revisional petition, the same was taken up for
hearing and accordingly an ex parte order was passed by the Revisional
Authority on the ground that the appellant had been intimated about
the date of hearing but they did not respond. It is the contention of the
revenue that no further opportunity was required to be granted to the
dealer. Thus, the revisional application was dismissed without
examining the merits of the matter. The explanation offered by the
appellants with regard to non-appearance on the date of hearing is that
the notice was not sent to the email address of the appellant but was
sent to the personal email account of their Chartered Accountant. In
our considered view, even assuming that revision petition was filed by
the Chartered Accountant or their authorized representative but in the
absence of vokalatnama notice is required to be sent to the party
concerned. Of course there are certain exceptions to this rule which we
need not ponder much in the instant case as we are satisfied that the
appellants should be entitled to an opportunity of being heard so that
the matter can be decided by the Fast Track Revisional Authority on
merits.
In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order passed in the
writ petition is set aside and the order passed by the Revisional
authority dated 10.11.2016 is set aside and the matter is remanded
back to the Fast Track Revisional authority for fresh consideration. In
the event, the case papers are not available with the Revisional
Authority the appellant shall be directed to reconstitute the papers and
an opportunity of personal hearing be afforded to the appellant and a
fresh order be passed on merits and in accordance with law. The
Revisional Authority is directed to take on file the revision application
within three weeks from the date of receipt of the server copy of this
order and complete the proceeding within three weeks thereafter.
Consequently, the connected application also stands disposed of.
There shall, however, no order as to costs.
(T. S. Sivagnanam, J.)
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)
RP/Amitava (AR. CT.)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!