M/S. Bhavadharani Builders vs. The Superintending Engineer
Held
The Court, considering the limited request made by the petitioner and after hearing the learned counsel for both parties, disposed of the writ petitions. The Court directed the first respondent in each petition to consider the petitioner's representation dated May 10, 2023, and pass appropriate orders. This consideration and order were to be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the Court's order. No costs were imposed. The connected miscellaneous petitions were consequently closed. The judgment did not address any specific legal questions regarding GST or service tax liability, as the disposal was based on a direction to consider the representation.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Bhavadharani Builders, filed two writ petitions before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petitions sought a mandamus directing the first respondent, the Superintending Engineer of the Tamil Nadu Police Housing Corporation Ltd. (in one petition) and the Superintending Engineer of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (in the other), to consider their representation dated May 10, 2023. The core of the request was to direct the first respondent to remit the service tax component to the petitioner within a stipulated timeframe. The second respondent in both petitions was the Deputy Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Madurai-II Division. The petitions were filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated May 10, 2023, and remit the service tax component. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought a direction for the first respondent to consider their representation and remit the service tax component. No specific legal provisions or precedents were cited in the judgment for the petitioner's argument, beyond the general prayer for a mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution. Revenue/State's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the respondents. The order indicates that the Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, but the specific arguments of the respondents are not detailed.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.06.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA and W.M.P(MD) Nos.11790 and 11793 of 2023 W.P.(MD) No.13972 of 2023 M/s.Bhavadharani Builders, Rep by its Partner Mr.N.Palanikumar, No.64, Pasupathi Street, Jeeva Main Road, Sellur, Madurai.
... Petitioner
Vs. 1.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Police Housing Corporation Ltd., South Circle, No.1, Inspector quarters, TSP 6th Battalion Campus, New Natham Road, Madurai-625 014. 2.The Deputy Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Madurai-II Division, Central Revenue Buildings, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, BIBI Kulam, Madurai-625 002. ... Respondents
Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the representation dated 10.05.2023 and further direct the first respondent to remit the service tax component to the petitioner within a time frame as fixed
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.