M/S.Kamdar Sales Organisation vs. The Commissioner Of State Tax,CT And GST
Held
The Court held that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by its previous decision in the case of M/s. Field Motor Private Limited. In that case, the Court had directed the GST Council to reconsider the matter, taking into account the views of other High Courts and the ratio in the aforesaid case laws. Consequently, the present writ petition was disposed of in terms of the direction given in the Field Motor Private Limited case. The operative direction was to remit the matter back to the GST Council for reconsideration. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Kamdar Sales Organisation, a proprietorship/partnership firm, filed a writ petition challenging the action of the opposite parties (revenue/State) in rectifying a mistake apparent on the face of the record and allowing them to submit TRAN-1. The petitioner had made repeated requests to submit TRAN-1. The Court noted that the issue was squarely covered by its previous decision in the case of M/s. Field Motor Private Limited, Telengapentha, Cuttack – v- Union of India and others, W.P.(C) No. 17282 of 2018, which was disposed of on 13.03.2019 and modified on 03.04.2019.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to submit TRAN-1, considering the circumstances and the previous orders of this Court? (Mixed question of law and fact, relating to the interpretation and application of GST provisions concerning TRAN-1 submission). Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that they are entitled to submit TRAN-1 and challenged the revenue's action. They relied on the principle that mistakes apparent on the face of the record should be rectified and that their repeated requests should be considered. Revenue/State: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue/State. However, their action of rectifying the mistake and allowing submission of TRAN-1 suggests an acknowledgment of the petitioner's claim or a procedural step taken in light of previous judicial pronouncements.
Sections Cited
TRAN-1
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
01.05.2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner, which is a proprietorship/Partnership firm named and styled as M/s Kamdar Sales Organisation, has challenged the action of opposite parties in rectifying the mistake apparent on the face of the record and allowing it to submit TRAN-1 in spite of repeated request made by it.
The issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of M/s. Field Motor Private Limited, Telengapentha, Cuttack – v- Union of India and others in W.P.(C) No. 17282 of 2018, which was disposed on 13.03.2019 and modified today, i.e. on 03.04.2019, with the following direction:
“Taking into consideration the views of other High Courts, we direct the GST Council to reconsider since the time is extended. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back to the GST Council to reconsider the case taking into consideration the ratio in the aforesaid case laws.”
In that view of the matter, this writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the direction of this Court in the case of Field Motor Private Limited (s
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 Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.