Wintary Enginnering Chemical PVT. LTD vs. State Of Maharashtra And Anr

WP/9988/2023HC BombayGSTCNR HCBM01035286202308 August 2023Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN16 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's first contention regarding jurisdiction was untenable. It found that the notification dated May 14, 2015, when read in conjunction with Article 243-Q of the Constitution and Section 3(3)(a) and (b) of the MMC Act, clearly included Village Chole within the revised boundaries of the larger urban area of the Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal Corporation, as specified in Schedule-II of the notification. Regarding the second contention, the Court held that the LBT provisions remained applicable for the relevant period due to the saving provisions of Section 78 of Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 2017 and Section 173 of the MGST Act, 2017. These sections preserved the effect of existing LBT laws and rules for purposes including assessment and recovery, even after the introduction of the GST regime. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the argument that the deletion of LBT provisions by Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 2017 invalidated the assessment. The Court declined to examine the third contention regarding interest and penalty, noting that the rules clearly provided for such levies and that the petitioner had voluntarily registered and partly paid the LBT. The Court also observed that the challenge to interest and penalty appeared to be a "contention in desperation." The Court dismissed the petitions but clarified that this dismissal would not preclude the petitioner from availing the alternate remedy of filing an appeal under Section 406 of the MMC Act, with all contentions expressly kept open.

Facts

The petitioner, Wintry Engineering & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., filed three writ petitions challenging assessment orders dated September 14, 2022, and a demand notice dated June 14, 2023, concerning Local Body Tax (LBT) for the financial years 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2017-18. The petitioner argued that its factory in Chole Village is outside the jurisdiction of the Kalyan-Dombivali City Municipal Corporation (KDMC). Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the LBT provisions under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (MMC Act) were deleted by Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 2017, rendering the assessment and demand invalid. The petitioner also challenged the legality of interest and penalty levies, deeming the relevant rules ultra vires the MMC Act. The respondents opposed the petitions, asserting that the petitioner had an alternate remedy of statutory appeal under Section 406 of the MMC Act.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's factory in Chole Village falls within the jurisdiction of the Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal Corporation for the levy of Local Body Tax, considering the notification dated May 14, 2015, issued by the Government of Maharashtra, Urban Development Department, and its impact on the definition of the larger urban area under Section 2(30A) and Section 3 of the MMC Act, read with Article 243-Q of the Constitution? 2. Whether the deletion of Local Body Tax provisions by Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 2017 invalidates the assessment and demand of LBT by the Municipal Corporation, or if Section 78 of Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 2017 and Section 173 of the MGST Act, 2017, preserve the applicability of LBT provisions for the relevant period? 3. Whether the levy of interest and penalty under the LBT Rules is illegal and ultra vires the MMC Act? Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioner argued that Chole Village is outside the KDMC's jurisdiction based on the notification dated May 14, 2015, which did not include it in Schedule-I. - The petitioner contended that the deletion of LBT provisions by Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 2017 meant no warrant for assessment or demand. - The petitioner argued that LBT Rules do not permit the levy of penalty and interest, and if they do, they are ultra vires the MMC Act. Respondents' Arguments: - The respondents contended that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing statutory appeals under Section 406 of the MMC Act. - They argued that the petitioner's contentions were not tenable.

Sections Cited

Section 2(30A), Section 3, Section 127, Section 406, Section 78, Section 173, Article 243-Q

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
905-wp 9988-23@9989@9990-23.odt Prajakta Vartak IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9988 OF 2023 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 9989 OF 2023 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 9990 OF 2023 Wintry Engineering & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents __________ Mr. R. V. Desai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Deepak Bapat, Ms. Sonali Bapat, Mr. Sumedh Hinge and Mr. Pramod Kathane for Petitioner. Ms. Shruti Vyas, ‘B’ Panel Counsel for State/Respondent No.1. Mr. A. S. Rao for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. __________ CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 08, 2023

ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per G.S.Kulkarni, J.):

1.

These are three petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby a challenge has been raised by the petitioner to the assessment orders dated 14 September, 2022 pertaining to the financial years 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18, assessing the petitioner for payment of the Local Body Tax (for short, “the LBT”) under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (for short, “the MMC Act”) by the Kalyan-Dombivali City Municipal Corporation (for Page 1

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.