Case Summary
Case Title: LGW Industries Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, ITC Investigation Unit & Ors.
Court: High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction (Appellate Side)
Petition Number: M.A.T. 214 of 2025 with I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 18 February 2025
Relevant Section: Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 (Appellate remedy)
Category of Dispute: Input Tax Credit (ITC) – Adjudication and Appeal
Facts (Paras 1–4)
The appellant, LGW Industries Ltd., challenged the adjudication order dated 19 July 2024 alleging denial of natural justice. They argued that (i) no personal hearing was given, (ii) no opportunity to file written submissions was allowed, and (iii) the request for cross-examination of witnesses whose statements were relied upon was ignored. The appellant also highlighted that another officer of the same department had granted them refund earlier, thereby acknowledging genuineness of transactions. The Single Judge, however, had directed the appellant to avail the appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
Questions (Para 2–3)
-
Whether the writ petition was maintainable despite availability of statutory appeal under Section 107 CGST Act?
-
Whether denial of cross-examination and lack of hearing justified bypassing the appellate process?
Observations (Paras 5–7)
The Division Bench noted that the matter required a deep adjudication of facts, not a simple procedural correction. It was not a case of exceptional circumstances warranting writ jurisdiction. Moreover, the adjudication order was passed in July 2024, but the writ petition was filed only in January 2025—beyond the time limit prescribed for appeal. Despite this, the Single Judge had permitted the appellant to file an appeal within a timeframe, which was considered just and proper.
Judgment (Paras 7–13)
The Court dismissed the intra-Court appeal, affirming that the proper course was to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act within 30 days from receipt of this judgment. The appellant was granted liberty to raise all factual and legal contentions before the appellate authority, which must decide the matter after personal hearing. Additionally, the Court directed that amounts already recovered from the electronic credit ledger could be considered for adjustment against pre-deposit, subject to application before the appellate authority.
Cases Referred (Summary Table)
| Case | Citation | Verdict / Principle |
|---|---|---|
| LGW Industries Ltd. (present case) | M.A.T. 214 of 2025 | Writ petition not maintainable when statutory appeal under Sec. 107 CGST Act available; appeal to be filed within extended time. |
Between Fine Lines
For trade and industry, this ruling reinforces that statutory appellate remedies under GST cannot be bypassed except in rare, exceptional cases. Even allegations of lack of hearing or denial of cross-examination must ordinarily be raised before the appellate forum. Businesses should thus be cautious to adhere to statutory timelines for filing appeals, while also ensuring that any recovery already made from credit ledgers is properly adjusted against mandatory pre-deposits.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
