SABYASACHI CALCUTTA LLP v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, WARD 206, ZONE 11, DGST ORS.
W.P.(C)/11125/2024 · 2026-07-28
Anil Kshetarpal, Shail Jain
Writ Petition (Civil)body2024
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 3328 (DEL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 3328 (DEL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11125/2024 and CM APPL. 46000/2024 SABYASACHI CALCUTTA LLP
.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeev Agarwal and Mr. R. Satish Kumar, Advs. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, WARD 206, ZONE 11, DGST ORS. .....Respondents Through: Counsel (Appearance not given).
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN O R D E R %
28.07.2026
1.
Learned Counsel representing the Petitioner submits that the
order dated 22.04.2024 is perverse, as the Petitioner was granted a hearing on 13.02.2021 by the Assistant Commissioner, DGST, whereas the impugned order dated 22.04.2024 has been passed by the Sales Tax Officer, DGST.
2. On a query put by the Court, learned Counsel representing the Petitioner admits that the aforesaid fact has not been pleaded in the present writ petition. Undoubtedly, in a connected writ petition, such an averment had been made and the order impugned therein was set aside. However, no such averment has been made in the present writ petition.
3. In the short counter affidavit filed by the Respondents, the only averment made is that the Petitioner was granted hearing on 13.02.2021. However, it is not clear whether the petitioner attended the hearing before the Assistant Commissioner, DGST or before the Sales Tax Officer, DGST, who subsequently passed the impugned order.
4. The petitioner has also not filed any rejoinder. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 15:42:54
5. In these circumstances, this Court does not find it appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 22.04.2024, particularly when the petitioner has an efficacious statutory remedy of appeal.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition, along with all pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
SHAIL JAIN, J. JULY 28, 2026/pd/dg This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 15:42:54