M/S. Narayan Marbles vs. State Of Rajasthan And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the respondents are liable to issue 'C' forms in respect of High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade. This decision was based on the ratio of the Court's previous judgment in Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5506/2018). The Court reasoned that the amendment to the definition of 'Goods' in the CST Act did not preclude the issuance of 'C' forms for HSD used in mining. The ratio decidendi is that 'C' forms are to be issued for HSD procured for mining purposes through interstate trade, irrespective of the amendment to the definition of 'Goods' in the CST Act, as established by precedent. The Court directed that if the petitioner had paid any amount due to the wrongful refusal to issue 'C' forms, they would be entitled to a refund or adjustment from the concerned authorities. These claims are to be processed within twelve weeks of being made in writing by the petitioner, along with requisite documents.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Narayan Marbles, sought a direction from the Rajasthan High Court to compel the respondents to issue 'C' forms. The petitioner had previously purchased High Speed Diesel (HSD) using 'C' forms for manufacturing activities under the pre-GST regime. However, this was denied post-GST due to an amendment to Clause (d) of Section 2 of the CST Act, which redefined 'Goods'. The denial was based on the contention that HSD, as redefined, was no longer eligible for 'C' forms. The respondent authorities are the State of Rajasthan and the Union of India, along with their respective departments and officials.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents are liable to issue 'C' forms in respect of High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade, considering the amendment to Clause (d) of Section 2 of the CST Act? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that they were entitled to 'C' forms for HSD procurement for manufacturing activities, as they had been doing so in the pre-GST regime. The amendment to the definition of 'Goods' should not disentitle them from this benefit for interstate purchases. Revenue/State's Argument: The respondents denied the issuance of 'C' forms based on the amendment to Section 2(d) of the CST Act, implying that HSD, as per the amended definition, did not qualify for 'C' form benefits. The judgment notes that the issue was not res integra and was covered by a previous decision of the Court.