Facts of the Case:

In this case, the writ petition was filed challenging an order passed by the appellate authority under Section 107. The petitioner contended that all relevant documents had already been placed before the adjudicating authority and that those documents sufficiently supported its case. However, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal by repeatedly observing that “no further explanation and supporting documents have been furnished by the appellant at appeal stage” and confirmed the adjudication order without substantively dealing with the grounds raised.

Issue:

Whether the appellate authority’s order, which merely reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority without independently examining the grounds of appeal and supporting documents, is sustainable in law?

Held that:

The High Court held that the appellate order suffered from non-application of mind. It observed that the appellate authority had merely paraphrased the findings of the adjudicating authority and failed to consider the detailed explanations provided in the memorandum of appeal. The repeated use of identical reasoning for each issue demonstrated a mechanical approach.

The Court noted that when explanations are furnished in appeal, the appellate authority is duty-bound to examine them, evaluate their merit, and assign reasons for either accepting or rejecting them. Even if the authority disagrees with the appellant, it must provide cogent reasons. In the present case, there was no indication that the explanations or documents already on record were examined. On this ground alone, the appellate order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. 

Case Name: Fratelli Vineyards Limited formerly known as Tinna Trade Limited & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. dated 23.02.2026