Gokul Agro Resources LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that the principal relief prayed for by the writ applicant had already been granted by virtue of this Court's previous judgment in Mohit Minerals Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India. In that judgment, Entry No. 10 of Notification No. 10/2017-IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017, was declared ultra vires Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, 2017, and Article 14 of the Constitution of India, for lack of legislative competency, rendering the notification unconstitutional. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to a refund of the IGST paid under the struck-down notification. The Court directed the petitioner to prefer an appropriate application for refund to the competent authority. The competent authority was instructed to examine the refund application immediately, pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, keeping in mind the Mohit Minerals decision, and not raise any technical issues. This exercise was to be completed within four weeks from the receipt of the writ.
Facts
The petitioner, Gokul Agro Resources Ltd., filed a writ application challenging Entry No. 10 of Notification No. 10/2017-IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017. The petitioner sought to strike down this entry as ultra vires Section 5(3) of the IGST Act and Article 14 of the Constitution, and to obtain a refund of IGST paid pursuant to this entry, along with interest. The petitioner had paid a total of Rs. 7,69,13,004 in IGST on ocean freight for the periods 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 (till November 2019). The High Court had previously, in the case of Mohit Minerals Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India, declared Entry No. 10 of the said notification as ultra vires.
Key Issues
1. Whether Entry No. 10 of Notification No. 10/2017-IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017, is ultra vires Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, 2017, and Article 14 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that Entry No. 10 of the impugned notification is ultra vires Section 5(3) of the IGST Act and Article 14 of the Constitution. They sought a declaration to this effect and a consequential refund of the IGST paid. They relied on the High Court's own previous judgment in Mohit Minerals Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India, which had declared the same entry ultra vires. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or the respondents.
Sections Cited
Section 5(3), Article 14
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1 Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Nirzar Desai, the learned standing counsel waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondents. 2 By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: “19A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ striking down and declaring Entry No.10 of Notification No.10/2017IGST(Rate) dated 28.6.2017 as being ultravires Secti
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 Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.