Aak Kamani PVT. LTD. vs. The Union Of INDIA And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, AAK India Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging certain GST notifications. The petitioner argued that the issue was covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. The respondents, the Union of India and others, agreed with this contention. A coordinate bench of the High Court had previously disposed of similar petitions based on the Mohit Minerals judgment. The present petition was filed challenging the imposition of IGST on a specific transaction, with the amount in dispute not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history involves the petitioner relying on a Supreme Court precedent and a prior High Court order on similar matters.
Held
The Court held and declared that Serial No. 10 of Notification 10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017, read with Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, and Notification No. 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017, along with its corrigendum dated 30th June 2017, to the extent they seek to impose IGST on the impugned transaction, are unconstitutional. The Court's reasoning was based on the agreement of both parties that the issue was covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. The ratio decidendi is that if a matter is squarely covered by a Supreme Court judgment, the High Court should follow it. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition in terms of the order passed by a coordinate bench in similar matters, which included payment of any refund due within eight weeks with applicable interest. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether Serial No. 10 of Notification 10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017, read with Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, and Notification No. 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017, along with its corrigendum dated 30th June 2017, to the extent they impose IGST on the impugned transaction, are unconstitutional? Petitioner's contention: The issue raised in the petition is squarely covered by the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Revenue's contention: The counsel for the respondents (Revenue) agreed that the issue is covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd.
Sections Cited
Section 5(3), Notification 10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), Notification 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
following order:- “1 Notification 10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017, 1 2022 SCC OnLine SC 657 ------------------------- 07 July, 2023
2-wp 11137-19(2).odt read with Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, with Notification No.8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rte) dated 28th June 2017, and corrigendum dated 30th June 2017 to Notification No.8/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) to the extent they seek to impose IGST on the impugned Transaction to be unconstitutional. Petitions disposed. 3 Wherever refund is payable, the same shall be paid within eight weeks of receiving the copy of this order with applicable interest in accordance with law. 4 At the request of Mr. Rishabh Jain and Mr. Prithwiraj Choudhuri Writ Petition No.1138 of 2019 and Writ Petition No.385 of 2019 respectively are excluded from this group of matters. It be listed for final hearing on 29th September 2022.” 2. counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the present petition can also be disposed of in terms of the orders passed in Writ Petition No.2362 of 2017 (Victory Ventures & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.) and other connected petitions.
The petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the order dated 10 August, 2022 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Victory Ventures & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra).
Disposed of in the above terms. No costs. [JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [G. S. KULKARNI, J.] ------------------------- 07 July, 2023
Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.