Usha Gupta VS Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

The writ petition challenges the order dated 28th July 2022 issued by the Senior Joint Commissioner of WBGST, which is found on page 37 of the petition. This order was made in appeal against the adjudication order dated 18th March 2020. Upon reviewing the adjudication summary.

the grounds of non-compliance of certain procedural requirements. The petitioner contends that the adjudication order dated 18th March, 2020, lacks substantive reasoning and asserts that neither the full text nor a detailed summary of this order was provided to them at any stage. The crux of the petitioner’s argument revolves around procedural fairness and due process, highlighting that they were deprived of a fair opportunity to contest the adjudication.

Moreover, the petitioner challenges the appellate authority’s order dated 28th July, 2022, which is briefly stated as a one-line dismissal of the petitioner’s appeal. The petitioner asserts that this dismissal fails to address the substantive issues raised and does not provide adequate justification for upholding the original adjudication.

In essence, the writ petition seeks judicial review of both the adjudication order and the appellate authority’s decision, emphasizing the denial of procedural fairness, lack of reasoned decisions, and inadequate communication of orders to the petitioner throughout the proceedings. The petitioner urges the court to set aside the impugned orders and grant appropriate relief in accordance with law.

The petitioner has filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 28th July 2022 issued by the Senior Joint Commissioner of WBGST in Appeal, as documented on page 37 of the petition. This appeal was lodged against the adjudication order from 18th March 2020. Upon reviewing the adjudication summary of the March 2020 order, it was found to lack substantive reasons. The petitioner contends that neither the full text of the order nor a summary was provided to them at any time.

Examining the appellate authority’s impugned order, it was noted to be a brief dismissal of the petitioner’s appeal, citing delay in its submission as the grounds for dismissal. The petitioner asserts that they only became aware of the summary order from March 18, 2020, when their bank account was debited on 28th July.

The petitioner in this writ petition challenges the order dated 28th July 2022 issued by the Senior Joint Commissioner of WBGST in Appeal, which itself was filed against an adjudication order dated 18th March 2020. The adjudication order of 18th March 2020, upon review, appears to lack any substantial reasoning. The petitioner asserts that neither the full text of this order nor a detailed summary was provided to them at any time.

Regarding the appellate authority’s order dated 28th July 2022, it is noted to be a brief dismissal of the petitioner’s appeal citing delay in submission. The petitioner argues that their awareness of the adjudication order’s summary only arose on 28th July 2022 when their bank account was debited, thereby explaining the delay in filing their appeal. They further contend that the delay was partly due to circumstances during the Covid-19 pandemic, claiming protection under relevant Supreme Court orders.

In light of these submissions and the factual record, it is emphasized that the adjudication order of 18th March 2020 was exceptionally terse, lacking substantive reasons. The petitioner’s challenge rests on the procedural fairness and the adequacy of notice provided to them.

In this writ petition, the petitioner has contested the order dated July 28, 2022, issued by the Senior Joint Commissioner of WBGST in Appeal, which was filed against the adjudication order dated March 18, 2020. The petitioner argues that the adjudication order lacked reasoning, and asserts that neither the full text of the order nor a summary was provided at any time. The appellate authority’s order, which dismissed the appeal due to a delay in submission, was also criticized for its brevity, providing only a one-line justification.

The petitioner contends that it only became aware of the summary order from March 18, 2020, when its bank account was debited on July 28, 2022. It further justifies the delay in filing the appeal, citing the Supreme Court’s order regarding delays caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

After examining the submissions and reviewing the records, it was observed that both the original adjudication order and the appellate authority’s decision lacked substantive reasoning, consisting only of brief, one-line conclusions. Consequently, the writ petition, numbered WPA 17530 of 2022, is disposed of by overturning the appellate authority’s order from July 28, 2022. The matter is remanded to the appellate authority for a new decision that includes detailed reasons and addresses the merits of the appeal in accordance with the law.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: