M/S Yogi Bharatgas Gramin Vitarak vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is constitutionally valid. This decision was based on a prior judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the Patna High Court, dated 08.09.2023, passed in CWJC No.9108 of 2021 and other analogous cases. The Court respectfully followed this precedent. The reasoning for the validity of Section 16(4) is not elaborated upon in this judgment, as it relies entirely on the earlier decision. The ratio decidendi is that provisions similar to Section 16(4) of the Bihar GST Act have been upheld by this Court. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Yogi Bharatgas Gramin Vitarak, a proprietorship firm, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The respondents included the Union of India, the State of Bihar, and various CGST and State Tax authorities. The specific tax period and amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates this is a writ jurisdiction case.

Key Issues

1. Whether Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is constitutionally valid? The petitioner argued that this provision is unconstitutional. The revenue, represented by the Union of India and the State of Bihar, contended that the provision is constitutionally valid. The judgment does not explicitly detail the specific arguments or legal provisions relied upon by either side beyond the naming of Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.