Mukesh Poddar vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue
2024 Latest Caselaw 4639 Cal

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Mukesh Poddar vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue on 10 September, 2024

Author: T.S. Sivagnanam

Bench: T.S. Sivagnanam, Hiranmay Bhattacharyya

Form No. J.(2)
Item No.2


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 APPELLATE SIDE

                               HEARD ON: 10.09.2024

                            DELIVERED ON: 10.09.2024
                                  CORAM:
                 THE HON'BLE MR. CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
                                   AND
             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

                                  M.A.T. 1639 of 2024
                                          With
                                  IA No. CAN 1 of 2024
                                           +
                                     CAN 2 of 2024
                                  Mukesh Poddar
                                         Vs.
          The Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Bally & Salkia
                               Charge & Ors.
Appearance:-
Mr. Mr. Anil Kumar Dugar
Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee
Mrs. Suman Sahani
                                                   ..... for the Appellant
Mr. A. Ray, Ld. G.P.
Md. T. M. Siddiqui
Mr. T. Chakraborty
Mr. S. Sanyal
                                                   .....for the State

                                     JUDGMENT

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

In Re. I.A. No. CAN 2 of 2024

1. We have heard the learned advocates for the parties.

2. There is delay of 103 days in filing the appeal. We have perused the affidavit

filed in support of the petition and we find that sufficient cause has been

shown for not being able to prefer the appeal within the period of limitation.

3. I.A. No.CAN 2 of 2024 is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is

condoned.

In Re.: M.A.T. 1639 of 2024

4. This intra-Court appeal by the writ petitioner is directed against the order

dated 8th April, 2024 in W.P.A. No.7934 of 2024, by which the appellant had

challenged the order passed by the authorities cancelling the appellant's

registration under the GST Act.

5. The learned Single Bench rightly held that there is no scope for passing any

interim order. Thus, we find that the appellant has not made out any ground

to interfere with the impugned order.

6. Accordingly, appeal and I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2024 stand dismissed.

7. The respondents are directed to file their affidavit-in-opposition within four

weeks from date; reply thereto, if any, may be filed within two weeks

thereafter.

8. List the matter before the appropriate Single Bench in the Combined Monthly

List of November, 2024.

9. No costs.

10. 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) CHIEF JUSTICE I agree.

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) Pallab/Krishnendu AR(Ct.)