Roshan Sharma v. Deputy Commissioner Of Revenue State Tax Strand Rd Chinabazar And Rajakatra Charge And ANR

Form No. J.(2) Item No.5 Pallab/KS AR(Ct.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE HEARD ON: 28.08.2025 DELIVERED ON: 28.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) M.A.T. 1212 of 2025 With I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025 Roshan Sharma, sole proprietor of M/s. ARS Metals

Versus

Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Strand Road, Chinabazar & Rajakatra Charge & Anr.

Appearance:- Mr. Vinay Shraff Mr. Dev Agarwal Ms. S. Podder Ms. Priya Sarah Paul ..........For the Appellant Mr. Amitabrata Roy, Ld. G.P.

Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty Mr. Saptak Sanyal ...........For the State (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.) 1.

The writ petitioner is the appellant before us, having been unsuccessful in challenging an order of adjudication dated 24th July, 2024. On an earlier occasion, the appellant had approached this Court and an order was passed in M.A.T. 854 of 2024 dated 7th May, 2024 remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority with certain observations/directions. Upon such remand, the adjudicating authority has conducted de novo adjudication and passed the order dated 24th July, 2024, by which, the authority has levied tax,

interest and penalty under the provisions of the C.G.S.T./W.B.G.S.T. Act, 2017.

2.

Admittedly, as against the adjudication order, the appellant has an effective alternate remedy of filing an appeal.

3.

Learned advocate appearing for the appellant would strenuously contend that with regard to the movement of the goods, the appellant was able to produce documents, which were available at their end, but, however, the details, as recorded in the Fastag Portal, cannot be accessed by the appellant and in this regard, the Department ought to have co-operated with the appellant and provided necessary details.

4.

Furthermore, learned advocate has also sought to canvass certain grounds as regards the effect of the statements given by the supplier during the crossexamination etc. In our considered view, to test the correctness of the impugned order, facts have to be adjudicated much of which is being disputed and denied by the Department.

5.

Therefore, we are not persuaded to exercise any discretion in the matter, since, the appellate remedy provided under the Act, is not only an effective remedy, but an efficacious remedy as well. The appellate authority will be able to appreciate the factual position, if necessary, it can call for the records and also direct its office to access the Fastag Portal etc. and all such grounds raised by the appellant can be canvassed before the appellate authority, which will be considered by the appellate authority after giving an effective opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant.

6.

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant should not be permitted to bypass the statutory appellate remedy. 7.

Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Bench.

8.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed along with the connected application (I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025) with a direction to the appellant to file a statutory appeal before the appellate authority and if such an appeal is filed within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of server copy of this judgment and order, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal without reference to limitation and subject to compliance of other conditions upon the appellant. The appellate authority shall consider all grounds that may be canvassed by the appellant and the documents submitted by them and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorized representative of the appellant, pass a reasoned order on merits and in accordance with law. 9.

The appellant will be entitled to make a specific request to the appellate authority with regard to the Fastag details, which according to the appellant, is a very vital document. This aspect shall be canvassed by the appellant before the appellate authority, which shall be taken note of in accordance with law. 10.

No 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) CHIEF JUSTICE I agree.

(CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)