A C R D Rengarajan vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Facts

The petitioner, A.C.R.D. Rengarajan, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 03.03.2026 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Virudhunagar-II Assessment Circle. The petitioner had not obtained GST registration and had not paid GST on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting mines and minerals under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM). The petitioner had also not made contributions to the District Mineral Foundation Trust (DMFT). The impugned order was passed under the provisions of the respective GST enactments. The petitioner sought to quash the order as illegal, without jurisdiction, and in violation of natural justice.

Held

The Court held that the facts of the present case are almost identical to the facts in the case of S. Pichandhi, Proprietor of Sri Murugan Ready Mix Concrete and Blue Metal Industries, Vellore Vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer, Vellore Rural Assessment Circle, Vellore, in W.P.Nos.35883 and 35889 of 2025 dated 25.09.2025. In that case, the Court had directed the respondent to keep all proceedings in abeyance and await the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the dispute relating to the levy of GST on seigniorage fee/royalty paid for quarrying mines and minerals. The Court found that the aforesaid order would hold good for the present writ petition as well. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of on the same terms as the cited case, implying that proceedings would be kept in abeyance pending the Supreme Court's decision. The Court did not explicitly decide on the legality or jurisdiction of the impugned order but rather deferred action based on the pending Supreme Court matter.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order passed by the respondent is illegal, without jurisdiction, and in gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, as contended by the petitioner? 2. Whether the proceedings should be kept in abeyance pending the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the issue of levy of GST on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying mines and minerals? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the impugned order is illegal and passed without jurisdiction, violating natural justice principles. The petitioner also relied on the pendency of the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, citing a previous order of this Court in a similar matter (S. Pichandhi, Proprietor of Sri Murugan Ready Mix Concrete and Blue Metal Industries, Vellore Vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer, Vellore Rural Assessment Circle, Vellore, in W.P.Nos.35883 and 35889 of 2025 dated 25.09.2025). Respondent's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the respondent. However, the respondent was represented by counsel.