Krishnan.T vs. The Government Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, T. Krishnan, a PWD Contractor, filed a writ petition seeking to quash Notification No. 6/2015-Service Tax dated 01.03.2015, which allegedly imposed service tax on works contract services provided to government entities. Alternatively, he sought a mandamus directing the Government of Tamil Nadu (respondents 4-6) to pay the service tax, interest, and penalty demanded by the central tax authorities (respondents 1-3) for the period between 01.04.2015 and 30.06.2017. The judgment notes that the petition was filed without challenging a specific assessment order dated 24.08.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Madurai-II Division.

Held

The Court noted that the writ petition was filed without challenging the assessment order dated 24.08.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise. The Court also referred to its own prior decision in Raju Constructions and others vs. The Government of India and others (2022) (1) Centax 251 Mad, which confirmed the tax liability of the petitioner. Given these circumstances, the Court found that the only recourse for the petitioner was to seek reimbursement from his employer, the Government of Tamil Nadu (respondents 4-6), by invoking a principle similar to Section 64(A) of the Sales of Goods Act, 1930. The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to file suitable representations to respondents 4, 5, and 6 for reimbursement of the service tax payable. The respondents were directed to consider these representations and pass appropriate orders, keeping in mind the decision in the Raju Construction's case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned Notification No. 6/2015-Service Tax dated 01.03.2015 is liable to be quashed, and consequently, whether the petitioner should be granted exemption from paying service tax on works contract services provided to government, local bodies, and statutory authorities with effect from 01.04.2015? 2. In the event the notification is upheld, whether the Government of Tamil Nadu (respondents 4-6) should be directed to pay the service tax, interest, and penalty demanded by the central tax authorities (respondents 1-3) in respect of works contract services provided to the Government of Tamil Nadu from 01.04.2015 to 30.06.2017? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner sought to quash the notification and be exempted from service tax. Alternatively, if the notification is upheld, he argued that the employer (Government of Tamil Nadu) should bear the tax liability, invoking a principle similar to Section 64(A) of the Sales of Goods Act, 1930. Revenue/State's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue or state respondents regarding the validity of the notification or the reimbursement claim. However, it references a prior decision of the Court in Raju Constructions and others vs. The Government of India and others (2022) (1) Centax 251 Mad, which confirmed the tax liability.