HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA, JALPAIGURI CIRCUIT BENCH CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE RESERVED ON: 02.03.2026 DELIVERED ON: 17.04.2026 PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA M.A.T. 54 OF 2025 WITH CAN 1 OF 2025 JAGESWAR SAW - VERSUS –

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, STATE TAX, BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (NORTH BENGAL), ALIPURDUAR ZONE AND ORS. Appearance:

Mr. Boudhayan Bhattacharyya, Adv.

Ms. Stuti Bansal, Adv. Ms. Keya Kundu, Adv.

Ms. Chayna Kumari, Adv.

Ms. Ayantika Bhattacharyya, Adv.

….. for the Petitioner Mr. Pretom Das, Adv. Ms. Rima Sarkar, Adv.

….. for the State Mr. Ajoy Kumar Singhania, Adv.

… ..for the U.O.I.

Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.:

1. This is an appeal from an order dated July 4, 2025, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court dismissing WPA No. 635 of 2024.

2. The Stay petition and the appeal were taken up and heard together with the consent of both parties.

3. The ground on which the writ petition was dismissed is twofold:-

a. A false declaration was made by the appellant herein, ostensibly with the intent of evading the tax payable by him;

and b. The driver of the vehicle was not an authorized person to sign and execute the delivery challan as a proper agent of the appellant.

4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal. Before rendering any decision on the issues raised by the appellant in this appeal, a brief narration of the facts is imperative for a better understanding of the case.

5. The conspectus of the facts with which we are concerned is that the appellant, an individual operating the business as a sole proprietorship concern in the name and style of M/s. N.S. Construction from Jharkhand, is engaged in the business of leasing and/or providing rental services of construction machinery and equipment, with or without persons to operate the same, as per the requirement of the customer.

6. The appellant is a duly registered entity under the provisions of the Jharkhand GST Act, 2017.

7. During the course of his business, the appellant received a work order for providing hydraulic excavator with driver on rental basis from one M/s. B.C.C., Buildtech Private Limited (hereinafter BCC) company registered in Haryana.

8. The hydraulic excavator was to be supplied by the appellant to the worksite BCC in Shillong, Meghalaya. The rental charge for the machinery had been agreed at the rate of 2.30 lakh per month. Upon obtaining such work order, the appellant had purchased the excavator from a supplier in Jharkhand and proceeded to supply the same by booking a trailer from Jharkhand to Meghalaya for supplying the excavator.

9. The excavator was being transported from Jharkhand to Meghalaya through West Bengal, which according to the appellant was merely being used as a transportation corridor.

10. On a routine inspection, the officials of the Bureau of Investigation, North Bengal, Alipurduar Zone intercepted the vehicle carrying the excavator on November 25, 2023. On demand, the driver of the transport vehicle, one Umesh Yadav (hereinafter referred to as Umesh) produced a copy of the delivery challan used by the proprietorship concern of the appellant, NS Construction, one copy of the e-way bill dated November 22, 2023, generated by the appellant as an URP (Unregistered Person), and a copy of the consignment note of the same date, that is November 22, 2023, issued by the Jharkhand trailer service, and a photocopy of the tax invoice issued by the vendor of the excavator, which showed the appellant as the purchaser. The consignment was physically verified upon notice to Umesh driver of the Transportation Company and in his presence.

11. Upon verification, it was found that the appellant, a registered person, had made a false declaration in the e-way bill that he was an unregistered person, ostensibly with an intention to evade tax. Umesh, the driver of the transportation company, was not in possession of a proper invoic