2026 (8) TMI 1124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(VC) with Mr. Dilip Kr. Agarwal, learned Advocate appears for the respondent nos. 4 and 6. 4. Through this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the GST authority dated February 20, 2025 at page 45 to the writ petition in exercise of power under Section 63 of WBGST Act, 2017/the CGST Act 2017 (hereinafter, the said 2017 Act). 5. Initially the order was not served upon the petitioner, as contended by her. The petitioner after come to know of the impugned order through email on March 9, 2026 annexure p-4 at page 28 to the writ petition had applied before the GST authority for obtaining the documents mentioned therein including the said impugned order when the impugned order ultimately was 'served again....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion is not maintainable and the petitioner should have applied before the first appellate authority under Section 107 of the 2017 Act. 10. Mr. Ratan Banik, learned Advocate appearing for respondent nos. 4 and 6 has adopted the submissions of Mr. Jagriti Mishra and prays for dismissal of this writ petition. Decision: 11. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, it appears to this Court that, the document of registration of the petitioner at page 22 is not disputed or denied. It further appears to this Court that, the provision under Section 63 provides for assessment of unregistered person. On a careful scrutiny of the impugned order it appears that, the grounds mentioned the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....down under 2017 Act, the impugned order does not demonstrate to be ex facie without jurisdiction unless a proper adjudication is made, for which fact finding enquiries are also required. Hence, the first appellate authority empowered under Section 107 of 2017 is the appropriate and jurisdictional forum, in the considered view of this Court. 15. Sub-section 4 to Section 107 provides the power upon the appellate authority to condone the delay in preferring the appeal having sufficient cause being found. Therefore, there is no absolute bar in entertaining an appeal beyond the period of limitation as mentioned in the statute, but of course subject to the satisfaction of the appellate authority upon sufficient cause being shown. 16. In vie....