Power And Instrumentation (Guj.) LTD. vs. Commissioner
Original PDF →Facts
This case involves a miscellaneous application filed by the applicant-department (Commissioner, CGST Commissionerate and others) before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur. The application pertains to a previous writ petition (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5274/2023) filed by Power And Instrumentation (Guj.) Ltd. In that prior judgment, dated 25.07.2023, the Court had directed the respondents (the department) not to insist on the petitioner-company paying Rs. 5,51,49,553/- mentioned in the impugned notices until final adjudication under Section 73 of the CGST Act. The Court also directed that Rs. 50,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner would remain subject to this final adjudication. The current application seeks liberty for the department to consider/adjudicate the issue under the general provisions of the Act of 2017, rather than being restricted to Section 73.
Held
The Court held that the applicant-department is not precluded from acting under the provisions of the Act of 2017. The Court clarified that the department has the freedom to proceed under the Act of 2017, strictly in accordance with law, as explained in paragraph 16 of the impugned (previous) order. This means the department can pursue adjudication under the Act, but must respect the conditions set in the earlier judgment regarding the disputed amount and the deposited sum, pending final adjudication. The Court did not explicitly state whether the original adjudication was to proceed under Section 73 or other sections, but affirmed the department's right to proceed under the Act generally, subject to the prior order's constraints.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant-department is precluded from proceeding under the general provisions of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, beyond the specific adjudication under Section 73, given the previous order of this Court? Petitioner's Argument: The judgment does not explicitly record any arguments made by the petitioner in this miscellaneous application. Revenue's Argument: The applicant-department (respondents in the original writ) sought liberty to adjudicate the issue under the broader provisions of the Act of 2017, not being confined solely to Section 73, while still adhering to the principles laid down in the previous order. They argued that the previous order should not restrict their ability to act under other relevant provisions of the Act.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 24/04/2024
Learned counsel for the applicant-department has drawn attention of this Court towards paragraph-16 of the judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5274/2023 on 25.07.2023, which reads as follows:- “16. In view of the aforesaid submissions, we dispose of this writ petition while directing the respondents not to insist the petitioner-company to pay the amount of
[2024:RJ-JD:17975-DB] (2 of 2) [WMAP-261/2023] Rs.5,51,49,553/-, as indicated in the impugned notices, till final adjudication is taken place under Section 73 of the CGST Act. It is also directed that the amount of Rs.50,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner- company through forms GST DRC-03 dated 16.12.2022 and 03.04.2023 shall remain subject to the final adjudication of the matter under Section 73 of the CGST Act 2017.”
Learned counsel for the applicant-department seeks liberty to the minimal extent that instead of under Section 73 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2017'), the issue should be left open to be considered/adjudicated under the provision of the Act of 2017. 3. Learned counsel respondent submits that notice under Section 73 of the Act of 2017 has already been received.
This Court determines that the applicant-department is not precluded from acting under the provisions of Act of 2017 and shall have freedom to proceed under the Act of 2017, strictly in accordance with law, as explained in para 16 of the impugned order.
Accordingly, the instant misc. application is disposed of. (YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 18-nirmala/-
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.