2025(06)LCX0410
Synthroma Laboratories
Versus
State of West Bengal
WPA 4150 of 2024 decided on 26-06-2025
26.06.2025
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 4150 of 2024
Synthroma Laboratories
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Sweta Mukherjee
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Anirban Ray, GP
Md. T. M. Siddiqui, AGP
Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee
Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty
Mr. Saptak Sanyal
… For the State.
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
2. Although the writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging pre-show cause notice dated 18th July, 2024 issued in Form GSTDRC-01A, threatening to invoke proceedings under Section 74 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) in respect of the tax period 2019-20, however, Ms. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the show cause notice under Section 74 of the said Act, dated 5th February, 2025, issued in Form GSTDRC-01 was, in fact, uploaded prior to filing of the writ petition and due to oversight, the same has not been included in the writ petition. Having regard thereto, she seeks leave to rely on such show cause and challenge the same by treating the above show cause as part of the writ petition. Let a copy of the above show-cause as placed before this Court today be taken on record.
3. It is the petitioner’s case that although the show-cause has been issued under Section 74 of the said Act, the proceeding ought to have been initiated under Section 73 of the said Act. Ms. Mukherjee would submit that by reasons of the aforesaid show-cause being issued under Section 74 of the said Act, the petitioner has been denied the benefit of availing Amnesty Scheme introduced on the insertion of Section 128A in the said Act. She would humbly submit that this Court may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner to avail the Amnesty Scheme, subject to the result of the writ petition.
4. Mr. Siddiqui, learned senior advocate and Additional Government Pleader appears on behalf of the respondents. He, however, seeks leave to file affidavitin-opposition to the present writ petition.
5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and noting that the petitioner seeks to challenge the show cause issued under Section 74 of the said Act and also considering the fact that the initiation of proceedings are based on alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit in respect of the supplies effected by the sellers whose registration has been cancelled with retrospective effect, I am of the view that the writ petition should be heard. However, having regard to the fact that the Amnesty Scheme introduced by the respondents in terms of insertion of Section 128A in the said Act, is due to expire on 30th June, 2025, and noting that the petitioner may have an arguable case, I am of the view that liberty should be afforded to the petitioner to avail the benefits of the Amnesty Scheme introduced pursuant to insertion of Section 128A in the said Act without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the present writ petition.
6. In the event, the petitioner applies before the appropriate authority for availing the benefits of the Amnesty Scheme, the concerned authority shall permit the petitioner to avail such benefits by treating the show cause issued in Form GST DRC 01 dated 5th February, 2025 to be under Section 73 of the said Act. All further steps including the deposit of tax pursuant to the aforesaid shall, however, abide by the result of the petition.
7. Let affidavit-in-opposition to the present writ petition be filed within a period of six weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, be filed within four weeks thereafter.
8. Liberty to mention for inclusion in the list after expiry of the period for filing of affidavits.
9. All parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble Court.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)