2025 (11) TMI 365

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etition. 2. The appellant runs his business under the name and style of M/s. Ashok Ghosh, he was served with a pre-show cause notice under Section 73(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act of 2017' in short) followed by an order under Section 74 thereof dated May 19, 2022 of the Adjudicating Authority i.e., the Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax Bureau of Investigation (North Bengal) Alipurduar Zone. 3. The petitioner, aggrieved by the said order of the adjudicating authority, had preferred an appeal under Section 107(1) of the said Act of 2017 with a prayer for condonation of delay. 4. The Senior Joint Commissioner of Revenue, Jalpaiguri Circle, the respondent no.3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t in the decision of S.K. CHAKRABORTY (supra), it has been held that the Section 107 of the said Act of 2017 is directory in nature not mandatory, the effect of the said judgment is not diluted by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court staying the operation of it. In support of such contention, reliance is placed on another decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of PIJUSH KANTI CHOWDHURY vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. reported in 2007(3) CHN 178. 8. He further submits that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of RAM KUMAR SINHAL vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL reported in [2025] 177 taxmann.com 48 (Calcutta), even after taking into consideration the said order of stay, has held that Section 107(4) of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....In S.K. Chakraborty (supra), S.K. Chakraborty & Sons (supra) the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court categorically observed that the timelines stipulated in Section 107(4) of the WBGST Act are not mandatory and the provisions of the Limitation Act are applicable. 32. The mere fact that an order of stay has been passed in respect of the said judgment does not take away the value of the same as a precedent. The operation of the order between the parties therein has been stayed, but the ratio therein is binding on co-ordinate Benches as per the Law of Precedents." 12. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of PIJUSH KANTI CHOWDHURY (supra) has held that the stay in a pending appeal before the Apex Court does not amount to....