^®
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. |

SUJIT DAS vs. THE SENIOR JOINT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, STATE TAX, JALPAIGURI CIRCLE & Others
(Calcutta High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY

Pet. Counsel

Sandip Goraria.

Res. Counsel

Dilip Kumar Agarwal.

Pretom Das

Petitioner / Applicant	SUJIT DAS
Respondent	THE SENIOR JOINT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, STATE TAX, JALPAIGURI CIRCLE & Others
Court	Calcutta High Court
State	West Bengal
Date	Apr 24, 2024
Order No.	WPA 884 of 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 9768
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
1. The instant writ application has been filed, inter alia, challenging the refusal on the part of the appellate authority in refusing to condone the delay in maintaining the appeal under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 20171 by its order dated 19th January 2024. 2. It is the petitioner’s case that being aggrieved with the determination under Section 74 of the said Act dated 26th June, 2023, the petitioner had filed an appeal under Section 107 of the said Act. Since, the appeal was filed beyond the period of limitation the same was accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The appellate authority, however, appears to have rejected the said application for condoning the delay by its order dated 19th January 2024 and had consequentially disposed of the appeal. 3. Challenging the aforesaid rejection of the application for condonation of delay the present writ application has been filed. 4. Mr. Goraria, learned advocate appearing for the ....