^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

FLEMINGO DUTYFREE SHOP PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, SALT LAKE CHARGE & OTHERS
(Calcutta High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

T.S. SIVAGNANAM
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Pet. Counsel

Ankit Kanodia

Megha Agarwal

Piyush Khaitan

Res. Counsel

Anirban Ray

T.m. Siddique

Tanoy Chakraborty

Petitioner / Applicant	FLEMINGO DUTYFREE SHOP PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER
Respondent	THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, SALT LAKE CHARGE & OTHERS
Court	Calcutta High Court
State	West Bengal
Date	Sep 10, 2024
Order No.	M. A. T. 1739 of 2024 With I. A. No. CAN 1 of 2024
Citation	2024(9) TAXREPLY 11255
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
JUDGMENT (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.) 1. This intra-Court appeal filed by the unsuccessful writ petitioner is directed against the order dated August 28, 2024 in W.P.A. 16974 of 2024. In the said writ petition, the appellants had challenged the order passed under section 73 of the WBGST Act/CGST Act, 2017 dated April 8, 2024 for the tax period April 2018 to March 2019. 2. The learned Single Bench was of the view that the appellants should exhaust the appellate remedy available under section 107 of the Act and accordingly, directed the appellants to apply before the appellate authority within a time-frame. Aggrieved by such order, the appellants have filed the present appeal. 3. We have elaborately heard the learned advocates for the parties. As could be seen from the order of adjudication passed under section 73 (9) of the Act dated April 8, 2024, the appellants did not file any reply to the show-cause notice nor filed any prayer for adjournment and none appeared on behal....