GURUKRUPA TRADERS vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, AAYKAR BHAVAN,UNIT I, P-13 CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, 4TH FLOOR,KOL AND ORS

WPA/530/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCA001169202219 January 2022Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Hon'ble Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent concerned to consider and dispose of the representation to be made by the petitioner within two weeks from the date of the order. If a representation is made within this stipulated time, the respondent shall consider and dispose of it in accordance with the law by passing a speaking and reasoned order. This process must include providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representative, and the disposal should be completed within four weeks from the date of the representation. The Court explicitly recorded that it had not gone into the merits of the case and that the respondent should consider the case strictly in accordance with law. The petitioner was granted liberty to use the copy of the writ petition as its representation.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gurukrupa Traders, filed a writ petition (WPA 530 of 2022) seeking to prevent the Director of Income Tax and another respondent from selling or disposing of seized ornaments. The petitioner claims ownership of these ornaments and stated that they had not approached the concerned authority for redressal of their grievances. The petition was heard by the Hon'ble Justice Md. Nizamuddin.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents should be restrained from selling or disposing of the seized ornaments pending a representation by the petitioner. The petitioner argued that they are the owners of the seized ornaments and sought to prevent their disposal without proper recourse. The revenue's specific arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The core issue revolves around the immediate action required from the revenue authorities concerning the seized property in light of the petitioner's claim and the procedural path for grievance redressal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

19.1.2022 ks WPA 530 of 2022 sl. 23 Gurukrupa Traders Vs Director of Income Tax & Anr. Mr. Mati Sagar Tiwari, Mr. Hemant Tiwari … For the Petitioner. Mr. Raj Sharma … For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for relief by way of preventing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 from selling or disposing the seized ornaments in question, which the petitioner claims to be the owner of the same without approaching the authority concerned by way of any representation for redressal of its grievances. Considering the submission of the parties, this writ petition, being WPA 530 of 2022 is disposed of by directing the respondent concerned to consider and dispose of the representation to be made by the petitioner within two weeks from date and if such representation is made by the petitioner within the time stipulated herein, the respondent concerned shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law by passing a speaking and reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its

2 authorised representative within four weeks from the date of making such representation. The petitioner is at liberty to use the copy of this writ petition as its representation, if it wants and in that event, the petitioner will use a fresh copy of the writ petition upon the respondent concerned as a representation. It is recorded that this court has not gone into the merits of the case and the respondent concerned shall consider the case strictly in accordance with law. ( Md. Nizamuddin, J. )

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →