Mr Nirmal Kumar Jaipuria vs. The State Of Karnataka
Held
The High Court of Karnataka, by an order dated August 4, 2021, had previously decided a batch of writ petitions (including W.P.No.4601/2020) that raised identical issues concerning the demand for GST on ground rent. In the present writ petition, the Court noted that the issues were the same as those in the earlier batch of petitions. Therefore, following the precedent set by the order dated August 4, 2021, the Court disposed of the present writ petition. The specific findings and reasoning from the August 4, 2021 order, which would have addressed the legality of demanding GST on ground rent, are not detailed in this judgment but are implicitly applied. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition in line with the earlier order.
Facts
The petitioners, Mr. Nirmal Kumar Jaipuria and others, challenged a demand notice dated October 27, 2020, issued by the Assistant Director of Town Planning (South), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). The notice demanded a sum of Rs. 9,29,561/- from the petitioners, which included ground rent and Goods and Services Tax (GST) calculated at 18% on the ground rent amount. The petitioners are seeking to quash this demand notice. The present writ petition raises the same issues as those considered in Writ Petition No. 4601/2020 and connected cases.
Key Issues
1. Whether the demand for GST on ground rent is legally sustainable, considering the nature of ground rent and its treatment under GST law? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners argued that the demand for GST on ground rent is unsustainable. They relied on the fact that the issues in this writ petition are identical to those raised in W.P.No.4601/2020 and connected cases, which were disposed of by this Court on August 4, 2021. This implies that the petitioners likely argued that the previous judgment's findings on the GST demand would apply here. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (State of Karnataka and BBMP) in this particular writ petition. However, their participation as respondents indicates their stance in defending the demand notice.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.9351/2021 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN
MR.NIRMAL KUMAR JAIPURIA S/O LATE MR BISWANATH JAIPURIA, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/AT 863, 12TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 034. 2. MR. ADITYA JAIPURIA S/O NIRMAL KUMAR JAIPURIA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT 863, 12TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 034. 3. MR.VIKRAM JAIPURIA S/O NIRMAL KUMAR JAIPURIA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT 863, 12TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 034. ... PETITIONERS (BY SMT.ANUPARNA BORDOLOI, ADVOCATE (VIDEO CONFERENCING))
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
2 VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N R SQUARE, BENGALURU – 560 002. 3. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING (SOUTH) N.R.SQUARE, HEAD OFFICE BUILDING, ANNEX BUILDING, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BENGALURU – 560 002. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (TOWN PLANNING) BRUHAT
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.
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 Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.