Calcutta High Court

Calcutta High Court: The Division Bench of Debangsu Basak and Bibhas Ranjan De, JJ. disposed of a appeal which was directed against the order dated 09-02-2022 by which Judge was pleased to hold that, despite the assessee receiving further evidences with regard to the quantum of tax liability subsequent to the conclusion of the order of refund, there was no material irregularity in the order of refund warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 


Advocate appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner submitted that order of refund was passed on 03-05-2021 after which the assessee received Certificate of Export on 25-08-2021 and if such Certificate is placed before the revisional authority, the petitioner will be entitled to refund of the tax liability of the petitioner. The Certificate is a material evidence which the revisional authority needs to consider in order to assess the tax liability of the petitioner. It was further submitted that the tax authorities cannot derive undue benefit of circumstances which are beyond the control of the appellant/writ petitioner.  


Advocate appearing for the State submits that the adjudication of tax liability stood completed on the passing of the order of the revisional authority.  


The Court was of the opinion that the appellant/writ petitioner was not at all fault in not receiving the document dated 25-08-2021 that the appellant/writ petitioner seeks to place before the revisional authority. It is not a case that the appellant/writ petitioner was in possession of certain documents which the appellant/writ petitioner did not place before the revisional authority. Rather, it is a case where the appellant/writ petitioner received a document subsequent to the order of the revisional authority. Reasonable opportunity should be afforded to such assessee to bring such evidences to the notice of the tax authorities.


The Court thus held that another opportunity should be granted to the appellant/writ petitioner to place the document before the revisional authority. Revisional authority was requested to reconsider its order passed on refund taking into account the document dated 25-08- 2021 in accordance with law. 


[Nipika Agarwal v. Asst. Commr. of State Tax,  2022 SCC OnLine Cal 1490, decided on 09-06-2022] 

Mr  Sandip Choradia, Ms Esha Acharya : for the Appellant 

Mr Hirak Barman, Mr Bikramaditya Ghosh : for the State 

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.