^®
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. |

HRIDAY KUMAR DAS vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & OTHERS
(Calcutta High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY

Pet. Counsel

Himangshu Kumar Ray

Shiwani Shaw

Subhasis Podder

Res. Counsel

Anirban Ray

T.m.siddiqui

Tanoy Chakraborty

Petitioner / Applicant	HRIDAY KUMAR DAS
Respondent	THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & OTHERS
Court	Calcutta High Court
State	West Bengal
Date	Aug 21, 2024
Order No.	W. P. A. 9612 of 2024
Citation	2024(8) TAXREPLY 11197
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
ORDER 1. The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the order passed by the appellate authority on 31st May 2023 passed under Section 107 of the WBGST / CGST Act, 2017 (here in after referred to as the “said Act”). Challenging the order passed under Section 74 of the said Act dated 3rd November 2021 for the tax period from April 2019 to March 2020, an appeal had been filed and the same was disposed of by modifying the demand made in the original order. 2. From the order impugned it would appear that the appellate authority had taken into account the amount realized from the recovery proceedings and the pre-deposit of taxes made at the time of filing the appeal and utilization of Input Tax Credit for setting off the output tax liabilities. 3. Mr. Ray, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the appellate authority had erroneously computed the liability of the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has a statutory r....