Divmak INDIA Diesel Spares And Ors vs. Assistant Commissioner Bbd Bag-Ii Division, CGST And Cx And Ors
Facts
The petitioner, Divmak India Diesel Spares, filed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act/WBGST Act. The petitioner brought to the Court's attention that this issue has already been settled by a Division Bench of the same High Court. The Division Bench, in its judgment dated December 13, 2023, in the case of M/s. BBA Infrastructure Limited Vs. Senior Joint Commissioner of State Tax & Ors., had upheld the constitutional validity of the aforementioned provisions. The present writ petition was filed before the High Court.
Held
The Court held that the issue regarding the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act/WBGST Act has already been settled by a Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench, in its judgment dated December 13, 2023, in the case of M/s. BBA Infrastructure Limited Vs. Senior Joint Commissioner of State Tax & Ors., had upheld the constitutional validity of these provisions. Therefore, following the precedent set by the Division Bench, the present writ petition was dismissed. The Court did not independently analyze the constitutional validity but relied on the prior binding decision.
Key Issues
1. Whether Section 16(4) of the CGST Act/WBGST Act is constitutionally valid? The petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of this provision. The revenue contended that the provision is constitutionally valid. The Court considered a prior judgment of its own Division Bench on this specific issue. The Division Bench in M/s. BBA Infrastructure Limited Vs. Senior Joint Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. had already ruled on the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act/WBGST Act.
Sections Cited
Section 16(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024 Bag-II, Division, CGST & CX, Kolkata North Commissionerate & Ors. Mr. Sandip Choraria, Mr. Rishav Manna. … For the Petitioner. Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee. …….for the UOI. Ms. R. V. Kundalia, Ms. Manasi Mukherjee. ……for the CGST. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of the provisions of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act/WBGST Act. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that now the issue has already been settled by the Division Bench of this Court in a judgment dated 13th December, 2023 in MAT No.1099 of 2023 in the case of M/s. BBA of State Tax & Ors., upholding the constitutional validity of the aforesaid provisions.
2 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration, the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench dated 13th December, 2023, this writ petition is dismissed. ( Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
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 Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.