A.Selvam vs. The Commissioner

Facts

The petitioner, A. Selvam, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 01.06.2026 issued by the Executive Officer of Arulmigu Chitira Ratha Vallaba Perumal Thirukovil. The notice demanded payment of GST at 18% for concluded license periods pertaining to the sale of 'Archanai Porutkal' (pooja items) at the temple, covered under Pasali Nos. 1434 and 1435. The petitioner sought to quash this demand and prevent the respondents from collecting GST or any consequential amounts for these periods. The respondents include the Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, and Assistant Commissioner of the HR & CE Department, along with the Thakkar and Executive Officer of the temple.

Held

The Court held that the issue involved in the present writ petition was no longer res integra and was covered by a previous order of the same Court in V.S. Raghavan vs. The Joint Commissioner / Executive Officer, Arulmighu Mariamman Temple. In that prior case, the Court had observed that the sale of Prasadams inside the temple, which is analogous to the sale of 'Archanai Porutkal' in this case, is exempt under Notification No. 2/2017 – Central Tax (Rate), Serial No. 98, and the corresponding State Government notification. Therefore, based on this precedent, the Court found that the issue was prima facie covered in favour of the petitioner. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the V.S. Raghavan decision, directing that there shall be no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions were closed. The Court also noted that it remains open for the GST Authorities and the respondents to proceed further in accordance with law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the demand for GST at 18% on the sale of 'Archanai Porutkal' for concluded license periods is legally sustainable, considering the nature of the transaction and relevant exemptions? (Question of law) Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the demand for GST is illegal and arbitrary. The judgment notes that the issue is covered by a previous order of the same Court in V.S. Raghavan vs. The Joint Commissioner / Executive Officer, Arulmighu Mariamman Temple. The petitioner relied on this precedent. The petitioner also implicitly argued that the sale of 'Archanai Porutkal' might be exempt from GST. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents. It only notes that the writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.