Sanjay Kumar Goyal vs The State Tax Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 1013 Cal

Item No.5.

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                             APPELLATE SIDE
                            HEARD ON: 07.02.2023

                          DELIVERED ON: 07.02.2023

                                  CORAM:

                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
                                   AND
         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA


                             M.A.T. 35 of 2023

                            Sanjay Kumar Goyal.
                                     Vs.
        The State Tax Officer, Jorasanko and Jorabagan Charge & Ors.


Appearance:-

Ms. Rita Mukherjee,
Mr. Ghanshyam Jha                     ...               for the appellant.

Mr. T. M. Siddique,
Mr. Debasish Ghosh,
Mr. Varun Kothari                     ....              for the respondents.


                                JUDGMENT

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

1. This intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dated

22nd November, 2022 in W.P.A. No.23967 of 2022. The appellant

had filed the writ petition challenging an order passed by the

authority cancelling the appellant's registration on the ground

that the registration was obtained by the appellant committing

fraud, suppression of facts and by making willful misstatement.

The appellant had filed the reply to the show cause notice

enclosing the copy of the trade licence, rent receipt, rental

agreement and contended that the appellant has been carrying on

business in the said premises ever since 2004 and have been

regularly filing the returns and paying taxes. That apart, the

appellant has got three other places of business, which are also

registered with the department. The authority rejected the

explanation offered and cancelled the licence largely relying

upon a report dated 25th August, 2022 submitted by the State Tax

Officer stating that in the said premises, there has been no

semblance of any business activity and appears to have been used

as a residential premises.

2. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant would

vehemently contend that it is not clear as to on what basis such

a report was drawn when there are sufficient documentary

evidence to establish that the appellant was / is carrying on

business in the said premises apart from other places of

business, which are also registered.

3. The learned Single Bench dismissed the writ petition on the

ground of alternate remedy. Aggrieved by the same, the

appellant has filed the present appeal.

4. Admittedly, the issues, which are now pointed out by the

appellant in this appeal are all factual or in other words, they

are disputed questions of fact. Therefore, it is but

appropriate for the appellant to avail the remedies, which are

available under the Act and not be permitted to bypass those

remedies as the authorities before whom the appellant would be

entitled to go questioning the correctness of the order of

cancellation will be able to appreciate or reappreciate the

factual position and then take a decision in the matter.

5. Thus, we are of the view that the finding rendered by the

learned Single Bench in this regard cannot be faulted. However,

we intend issuing appropriate directions so that the appellant

has an identical opportunity to establish his case that he is

carrying on business in the said premises for which purpose the

following directions are issued.

6. In the result, this appeal is disposed of by directing the

appellant to file an application before the authority for

revocation of the order of cancellation. Upon such application

being filed, the authority shall cause an inspection of the

premises in question after notice to the appellant and during

such inspection, the appellant shall produce documentary

evidence to establish that the business activities are being

carried on in the premises.

7. The appellant is also at liberty to make written

submissions. After considering the submissions made by the

appellant, the authority shall pass an appropriate order on

merits and in accordance with law.

8. The abovesaid exercise shall be commenced and completed

within a period of 15 days from the date on which the appellant

files an application for revocation of the order of

cancellation.

9. Needless to state that the appellant should not seek any

unnecessary adjournment and the appellant should cooperate in

the inspection, which is to be conducted by the authority in

terms of the above direction.

10. There shall be no order as to costs.

11. 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)