Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Sudipta Mahanta vs The Joint Commissioner on 14 June, 2022

Author: Md. Nizamuddin

Bench: Md. Nizamuddin

14.6.2022
   ks                      WPA 8442 of 2022
 sl. 8
                        Sudipta Mahanta
                               Vs
            The Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Raiganj
            Charge & Ors.

            Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray
                          ... For the Petitioner.
            Mr. A. Ray, Ld. GP.,
            Mr. T.M. Siddiqui,
            Mr. D. Ghosh
                          ... For the State.


              Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

              In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the

            impugned undated demand notice being Annexure P-3

            to the writ petition under the West Bengal        Value

            Added Tax Rules, 2005 relating to the period from 19th

            September, 2007 to 31st March, 2008, on the ground

            that the aforesaid impugned undated and unsigned

            demand notice has been raised without service of any

            adjudication order, if at all the same has been passed.

               Mr.    Siddiqui,   learned   Additional   Government

            Pleader is not in a position to justify the raising of

            such demand notice and could not produce any

            document.

               Considering the facts and circumstances of the

            case I am of the view that issues involved in this writ

            writ petition cannot be adjudicated without calling for

            affidavits.
                             2




  Respondents     are   directed     to   file   affidavit-in-

opposition within four weeks. Petitioner to file reply thereto, if any, within two weeks thereafter. List this matter for final hearing after seven weeks. At the time of hearing, parties should be ready with the short written notes of arguments. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner has been able to make out a prima facie case for interim order and accordingly respondents shall maintain status quo with regard to the demand in question being Annexure P-3 to the writ petition for a period of 12 weeks from date or until further order whichever is earlier.

( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )