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. 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 respondent is the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Virudhunagar-II Assessment Circle. The writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both parties.

Held

The Court held that the issue of levying GST on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting mines and minerals is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Citing its own previous order in 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, the Court found the facts of the present case to be almost identical. Consequently, the Court directed that all proceedings in the present writ petition be kept in abeyance, and the respondent shall await the orders to be passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court before proceeding in accordance with law. The petitioner was directed to deposit 10% of the disputed tax as security, in line with directions issued in the petitioner's own case earlier. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

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, concerning the levy of GST on seigniorage fee/royalty paid for quarrying and transporting mines and minerals under the Reverse Charge Mechanism. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issue of levying GST on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting minerals is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, proceedings should be kept in abeyance. Respondent's Contention: The respondent did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the court's decision implies an acceptance of the petitioner's submission regarding the pending Supreme Court matter.