M/S Devi Construction Through Its Proprietor Chandra Shekhar Prasad Singh vs. Central Goods And Service Tax And Central Excise Through The Commissioner CGST And Cx

Held

The Court held that the issue involved in the present writ petition is analogous to W.P.(T) No. 1143 of 2021 and other analogous cases, which were disposed of by this Court on 11.07.2024. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of in terms of the detailed reasons provided in the order dated 11.07.2024, passed in W.P.(T) No. 1143 of 2021 and analogous cases (M/s B.D. Enterprises through its Proprietor Uma Shankar Singh Vs. Union of India and others). The specific findings or reasoning from the order dated 11.07.2024 are not elaborated upon in this judgment. The operative direction is to dispose of the present petition in line with the previous order. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Devi Construction, has filed a writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court. The respondents are various authorities under the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) regime, including the Commissioner, CGST & CX, Jamshedpur, the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & CX, Ranchi, and the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & CX, Division-1, Jamshedpur. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not detailed in the provided order. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not elaborated upon, beyond the fact that the matter is now before the High Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present writ petition is to be decided in terms of the order passed by this Court in analogous cases, specifically W.P.(T) No. 1143 of 2021 and other analogous cases (M/s B.D. Enterprises through its Proprietor Uma Shankar Singh Vs. Union of India and others), dated 11.07.2024? The petitioner, M/s Devi Construction, has approached the Court. The respondents are the CGST authorities. The core of the issue, as presented in the order, is whether the present case should follow the precedent set by a previous judgment of the same Court in W.P.(T) No. 1143 of 2021 and other analogous matters. The petitioner's specific arguments or the revenue's contentions are not recorded in this brief order. The judgment does not mention any specific provisions of the CGST Act or Rules being argued by either party, nor does it cite any specific precedents other than the aforementioned analogous cases.