Parganas Circle vs The Mobile Store Limited
2023 Latest Caselaw 1279 Cal

                                            1




05   20.02.2023                   RVW 21 of 2023
RP   Ct. No. 16
AN                    Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, 24
                           Parganas Circle, Salt Lake & Ors.
                                         vs.
                               The Mobile Store Limited
                                          in
                                  MAT 1929 of 2022
                                   (CAN 1 of 2022)
                                The Mobile Store Limited
                                         vs.
                      Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, 24
                           Parganas Circle, Salt Lake & Ors.


                  Mr. A. Ray
                  Mr. T. M. Siddiqui
                  Mr. D. Ghosh
                  Mr. N. Chatterjee
                                                      ... for the appellant/State

                  Mr. Boudhayan Bhattacharyya
                  Ms. Taniya Roy
                  Ms. Sretapa Sinha
                  Ms. Stuti Bansal
                                                     ... for the State


                            We have heard learned counsel for both the parties.

                            This   review   application   has   been   filed   by   the

                  Commercial Taxes Department to review the judgment and order

                  dated 21.12.2022 passed in MAT 1929 of 2022. This review

                  application is largely based upon certain email communications

                  alleged to have been sent to the respondent assessee. All these

communications are dated October 2017 and around the said

time. The direction issued in the appeal was pursuant to the

submissions recorded by the Tribunal on 28.09.2018. Therefore,

any of the documents which are prior to the said date is of little

avail and based on those documents the review application

cannot be entertained.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the

respondent/writ petitioner that there is discrepancy in the

names, to which emails were sent. It has not been sent to the

registered email ID of the respondent assessee. This issue need

not be gone into and we are satisfied that the alleged

communications are much before 28th October, 2017, which in

our considered view was crucial date for all purposes which

convinced us to issue the direction as issued in the judgment

dated 21.12.2012. In any event, any subsequent communication

is sought to be relied upon by the review applicant, the same

cannot be pressed into service as it was a new document based

on which a review application cannot be entertained.

Thus, we are of the considered view that no grounds

have been made to review the order and judgment and order

dated 21.12.2022 and accordingly, the review application stands

dismissed.

The learned counsel appearing for the application after

the above order was dictated sought for extension of time granted

to comply with the order and direction issued in the appeal. The

direction issued in the appeal and the time stipulated in the

judgment and order dated 21.12.2022 is extended by a period of

four weeks from the date of receipt of the server copy of the order.

(T. S. Sivagnanam, J.)

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)