Shambhu Purbey vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, has already been decided in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. This decision was rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of the Patna High Court in CWJC No.9108 of 2021 and analogous cases on 08.09.2023. The present Court, respectfully following the aforesaid judgment, found no reason to deviate from the established precedent. Therefore, the writ petition challenging the provision was dismissed. The reasoning behind the previous judgment, which this Court followed, is not elaborated upon in this excerpt, nor are the specific arguments made by the petitioner in the present case detailed.

Facts

The petitioner, Shambhu Purbey, proprietor of M/s Purbey Battery, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The respondents include the Union of India and the State of Bihar, along with various tax authorities. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not explicitly mentioned in the provided judgment excerpt. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is not detailed, other than the filing of the petition itself.

Key Issues

1. Whether Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is constitutionally valid? The petitioner likely argued against its validity, possibly on grounds of being arbitrary or violating fundamental rights. The revenue, conversely, would have argued for its constitutional validity. The judgment states that this question has been answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee by a previous judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same Court dated 08.09.2023 in CWJC No.9108 of 2021 and other analogous cases. No specific arguments from either side are detailed in this excerpt, beyond the general framing of the issue.