Vinod Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA

CWJC/7968/2024HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01042116202413 May 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR,THE CHIEF JUSTICE-2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, Vinod Singh, is challenging a demand-cum-show cause notice dated September 13, 2021, issued by the CGST authorities. The petitioner claims to be engaged in government contracts and asserts that these contracts are exempted from Service Tax. The petitioner's grievance is that this notice has been issued despite the alleged exemption. The judgment does not specify the tax period or the exact amount in dispute. It is also unclear if any final order has been passed subsequent to the show cause notice.

Held

The Court held that it would not invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to verify the factual claim regarding the availability of exemption for the specific contracts executed by the petitioner. The Court reasoned that such factual verification is the primary responsibility of the authorities who issued the show cause notice. The Court also noted that if a final order has been passed subsequent to the show cause notice, the petitioner has a remedy by way of an appeal. Therefore, the Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedies.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to adjudicate on the factual claim of exemption from Service Tax for government contracts executed by the petitioner? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argues that their government contracts are exempt from Service Tax, and therefore, the demand-cum-show cause notice is unwarranted. They seek intervention from the High Court to address this issue. Revenue's contention: The revenue's contention is not explicitly recorded in the judgment. However, by implication, their stance is that the petitioner should pursue the available statutory remedies before the appropriate authorities.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7968 of 2024 ====================================================== Vinod Singh Son of Shivnath Singh Resident of K-502, White House, Flat No. 17, Hanuman Nagar, Kankarbagh, Patna- 800020. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, New Delhi. 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Govt. of India, New Delhi. 3. The Chief Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, New Delhi. 4. The Principal Commissioner of Central G.S.T. and C.X., 3rd Floor, C.R. Building (G.S.T. Bhawan), Birchand Patel Path, Patna- 800001. 5. The Joint Commissioner, C.G.S.T. and C. X. 3rd Floor, C.R. Building, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-800001. 6. The Deputy Commissioner, C.G.S.T. and C. X., Central Division, Ground Floor, Chandpura Palace, Bank Road, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dr. Alok Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh (ASG) Mr. Anshuman Singh Sr. SC, CGST&CX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 13-05-2024 The petitioner is aggrieved with the demand cum show cause notice issued at Annexure-P/1 which is dated 13.09.2021. It is not clear as to whether any order was passed subsequently or not. The petitioner’s contention is that the petitioner is engaged in Government contracts and is exempted from the payment of Service Tax. This is a matter which has to be Patna High Court CWJC No.7968 of 2024 dt.13-05-2024 2/2 agitated before the authority who issued the show cause notice. It is not clear as to whether any further order has been passed and if it has been passed, there is a remedy available by way of an appeal.

This Court would not invoke its extraordinary juri iction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to verify the facts as to whether the exemption was available to the specific contracts executed by the petitioner or not.

We would hence, dismiss the writ petition, leaving the petitioner to avail the alternative remedies, with just exceptions.

ranjan/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

(Harish Kumar, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date Transmission Date NA

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