Anil Kumar Pradhan vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Patna High Court, in its judgment dated September 18, 2023, held that Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is constitutionally valid. The Court reached this decision by respectfully following a previous judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of the same High Court on September 8, 2023, in CWJC No.9108 of 2021 and other analogous cases. The reasoning behind this holding is that the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) has already been affirmed by a coordinate bench, establishing a precedent. Therefore, the present writ petition, which raised the same question, was dismissed in light of the prior ruling. The ratio decidendi is that legislative provisions, once upheld as constitutional by a competent court, remain valid unless overturned by a higher court or amended.

Facts

The petitioner, Anil Kumar Pradhan, 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, the State of Bihar, and various CGST and State Tax authorities. The petition concerns the petitioner's rights and obligations under the GST regime. The High Court was presented with the question of the constitutional validity of the aforementioned section.

Key Issues

1. Whether Section 16(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is constitutionally valid? The petitioner likely argued that this provision infringes upon their fundamental rights or is otherwise ultra vires the Constitution. The revenue, represented by the Union of India and the State of Bihar, would have contended that Section 16(4) is a valid piece of legislation enacted within the legislative competence of the State and does not violate any constitutional provisions. The court was asked to decide if the restriction imposed by Section 16(4) on claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) is legally tenable.