The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →The Calcutta High Court set aside both a GST adjudication order and the rejection of a request to condone a late appeal in Silicon Ceramics & Ors. v. Additional Commissioner of State Tax, WPA 9470 of 2026. It directed the tax authority to consider the dispute afresh after receiving the petitioners’ reply and supporting documents. The court did not decide whether the GST demand itself was correct.
What happened in the GST case?
The dispute began with a show-cause notice dated 29 August 2023, which called for a reply by 29 September 2023. The personal-hearing date and venue field reportedly said “Not Applicable.” The petitioners said the notice appeared only in the GST portal’s “additional notices” section and was overlooked.
An order in original followed on 3 October 2023, recording that the petitioners had not replied. After learning of that order, they appealed and asked for the delay in filing the appeal to be condoned. The Additional Commissioner of State Tax, Asansol Circle, rejected that request on 12 February 2026, reportedly on the ground that the statute did not permit the authority to extend the appeal-filing period. The petitioners then challenged both the rejection and the original adjudication order before the High Court.
What did the Calcutta High Court order?
The court set aside both challenged orders and directed the authority to take up the dispute on its merits. It said the challenge to the original order should be considered without going into limitation, because the original adjudication had proceeded without considering the petitioners’ contentions or documents. The authority must receive and consider their evidence, hear them personally or through authorised representatives, and not reject their contentions on limitation grounds during that adjudication.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
#1 Best Overall
The order sets two successive deadlines:
- The petitioners must reply to the show-cause notice with supporting documents within four weeks from the date of the High Court’s order.
- The authority must hear the petitioners within four weeks after receiving that reply.
The reproduced order states: “Petitioners shall reply to the show-cause notice along with all documents in support thereof within a period of four weeks from date.”
Does this mean the GST demand was cancelled?
No. This was a remand that restored the petitioners’ opportunity to answer the notice and have their arguments and documents considered. The High Court did not rule on the correctness of the demand, decide the tax dispute on its merits, or hold that every notice placed in an additional portal section is invalid.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
What does the ruling mean if a GST notice appears only under “additional notices”?
In this case, the court’s decision turned on the admitted portal location of the notice and the possibility that the petitioners had overlooked it and consequently lacked an opportunity to reply. It ordered a fresh merits hearing in those circumstances. The outcome should not be treated as a general rule that a notice in an additional portal section is ineffective: the order is fact-specific, and the authority must still decide the tax dispute after considering the petitioners’ response.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →
