Synthite Industries Limited v. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 21118 OF 2021 PETITIONER: SYNTHITE INDUSTRIES LIMITED KADAYIRUPPU POST, KOLENCHERY, KOCHI 682 311 REPRESENTED BY ITS CFO AND COMPANY SECRETARY MR. SALES K FRANCIS BY ADVS. JOSE JACOB JAZIL DEV FERDINANTO RESPONDENTS: 1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110 001 2 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, KOCHI COMMISSIONERATE, IS PRESS ROAD, 682 018 3 JOINT DIRECTOR OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, KOCHI ZONAL UNIT, CENTRAL EXCISE BHAVAN, KATHRIKADAVU KOCHI 682 017 4 SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, KOCHI ZONAL UNIT, CENTRAL EXCISE BHAVAN, KATHRIKADAVU, KOCHI 682 017. BY ADVS. J.RAMKUMAR N.J.ASHWIN, CGC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.21118/2021 -2- J U D G M E N T Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P5 show cause notice proposing to demand GST on ocean freight from the petitioner who is an importer. When this matter is taken up for consideration, it is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the matter stands covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India and another v. M/s. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd.; 2022 VIL 30 (SC). It is submitted that the Supreme Court has categorically found that the demand of similar nature is in violation of principles of composite supply enshrined under Section 2 (30) read with Section 8 of the CGST Act. It is also been found that since the Indian importer is liable to pay IGST on the composite supply, comprising of supply of goods and supply of services of transportation, insurance, etc, in a CIF contract, a separate levy on the Indian importer for the supply of services by the shipping line would be in violation of Section 8 of the CGST Act.
Taking note of the above and after hearing the standing counsel appearing for the respondents, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that on the petitioner furnishing a reply along with a copy of the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above, the competent officer shall decide whether to proceed further to Ext.P5, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Prima facie, I am convinced that nothing further survives for adjudication in Ext.P5 in the light of the categoric finding of the Supreme Court noticed above. It is made clear that on the competent officer finding that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above, all further proceedings to the show cause notice will stand dropped. GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG
W.P (C) No.21118/2021 -3- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21118/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF NOTIFICATION NO. 8/2017 INTEGRATED TAX(RATE) Exhibit P2OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF NOTIFICATION NO. 10/2017 INTEGRATED TAX(RATE) Exhibit P3OF THE NOTICE Exhibit P4OF THE STATEMENT. Exhibit P5OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NUMBER 14/2021- 22(GST
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.