M/S.Indrani Patnaik vs. Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →
WP(C)/4167/2020HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01008748202018 January 2021Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE S.K.MISHRA4 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Heard together (2 matters)

W.P.(C) No.4167 of 2020
W.P.(C) No.15921 of 2020

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

03.

18.01.2021

This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.

2.

Heard Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned Assistant Solicitor General for Opposite Party No.1-Union of India and Mr. R.S. Chimanka, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for Opposite Party Nos.2 to 4-CGST.

3.

The Petitioner has filed this writ petition with a prayer to quash the order dated 27th November, 2019 passed by the Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-4 and issue direction to the opposite parties not to enforce the aforesaid order dated 27th November, 2019 vide Annexure-4 till disposal of SLP (Civil) No.37326 of 2017 in the case of Udaypur Chamber of Commerce v. Union of India which is pending before the Supreme Court and also to consider the incidental issues arising therefrom.

4.

Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the order impugned has been passed on 27th November, 2019 by the Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, Rourkela- Opposite Party No.2 vide Order-in-Original No.10/CCE/S.Tax/RKL/2019-20 dated 27th November, 2019 for the period from 1st April, 2016 to 30th June, 2017 directing levy and imposition of service tax on royalty, DMF & NMET treating the same as service purportedly under Section 65-B W.P.(C) No.4167 of 2020

-2- (44) of the Finance Act,1994 being in gross violation of ratio laid down by Supreme Court in the case of India Cement Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1995 (SC) 85, which matter is pending before the 9- Judge Bench of the Supreme Court, thereby the order so passed cannot sustain in the eye of law.

5.

Mr. R.S. Chimanka, learned Senior Standing Counsel, appearing for Opposite Party Nos.2 to 4-CGST submits that the similar question has been considered by this Court in W.P.(C) No.15921 of 2020 which has been disposed of on 22nd October, 2020 directing the Petitioner to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority within a period of fifteen days. It is also directed that if such an appeal along with Interlocutory Application is filed, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the appellate authority by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. He further submits that the case in hand being similar to W.P.(C) No.15921 of 2020, the Petitioner may be directed to file appeal before the appellate authority.

6.

Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned Assistant Solicitor General for Opposite Party No.1-Union of India submits that since the matter is between the Petitioner and Opposite Party Nos.2 to 4, Union of India has no objection if the Petitioner is directed to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority.

-3-

7.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered by the order passed in W.P.(C) No.15921 of 2020 disposed of on 22nd October, 2020, which has been duly agreed by the learned counsel for Petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel for Opposite Party Nos.2 to

4.8.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 22nd October, 2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.15921 of 2020. Since the matter is pending before the Supreme Court for adjudication, whether service tax is leviable on the royalty collected from the Petitioner for winning of minerals and, as such, an interim order has been passed by the Supreme Court to that extent, it is open to the Petitioner to bring all these facts before the appellate forum by filing interlocutory application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of the amount for entertaining the appeal. If such application is filed, the appellate authority shall consider the same keeping in view the orders passed by the Supreme Court and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Needless to say that the Petitioner shall prefer appeal before the appellate authority within a period of 15 days from today. If such appeal along with interlocutory application is filed, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the appellate authority by passing a reasoned and speaking order

-4- in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties.

9.

As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020. S.K. Guin

( Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

( S.K. Mishra ) Judge

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