M/S ANNU BAR AND RESTAURNT K.BHAWANI, ADARSH ILANGO, SOHINI BISWAS, DEB KUMAR BAWALI vs THE LT.GOVERNOR AND ORS. — MAT /66/2026
Case under Andaman and Nicobar Value Added Tax Regulation, 2017 Section NA. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: WBCHCP0003012026
Next Hearing
17th March 2026
Filing Number
MAT /66/2026
Filing Date
16-03-2026
Registration No
MAT /66/2026
Registration Date
16-03-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH , HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE(DAS)
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH , HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE(DAS)
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
SALES TAX ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Judicial Section
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M/S ANNU BAR AND RESTAURNT K.BHAWANI, ADARSH ILANGO, SOHINI BISWAS, DEB KUMAR BAWALI
Respondent(s)
THE LT.GOVERNOR AND ORS.
THE VALUE ADDED TAX OFFICER
THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER (VAT)
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH , HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE(DAS)
FOR ADMISSION
FOR ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION | |
| 19-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
Orders
Summary The High Court at Calcutta dismissed 51 intra-court appeals challenging a Single Judge's order that transferred 28 pre-August 19, 2025 VAT assessment cases to an Appellate Tribunal under section 73 of the VAT Regulation 2017, while dismissing 14 later-filed petitions for lack of alternative remedy. The court upheld the Single Judge's reasoning that an adequate statutory appellate mechanism exists, making High Court intervention inappropriate, and rejected appellants' arguments on limitation periods and natural justice violations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The High Court at Calcutta dismissed 51 intra-court appeals challenging a Single Judge's order that transferred 28 pre-August 19, 2025 VAT assessment cases to an Appellate Tribunal under section 73 of the VAT Regulation 2017, while dismissing 14 later-filed petitions for lack of alternative remedy. The court upheld the Single Judge's reasoning that an adequate statutory appellate mechanism exists, making High Court intervention inappropriate, and rejected appellants' arguments on limitation periods and natural justice violations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts