M/S R.P. Construction Having Its Office At Dak Bungla Road, Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur vs. The Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, M/s R.P. Construction, challenged the dismissal of its appeal by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), Bhagalpur Division. The petitioner contended that the Appellate Authority failed to consider a certificate (Annexure-P/8) issued by the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Banka, stating that Shiv Shankar Singh (proprietor of R.P. Construction) had not performed any contractual work. The assessment order was based on TDS deduction by the Executive Engineer. The State argued that the proprietor had two businesses, a proprietorship (RP Construction) and a dissolved partnership. They also contended that Annexure-P/8 was unreliable as it was issued in the name of Shiv Shankar Singh, not R.P. Construction, and that no such certificate was permissible for assessment purposes under the BGST Act. The State further argued that the Appellate Authority noted no document was produced at the hearing, and a screenshot did not prove Annexure-P/8 was submitted.

Held

The Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no reason to entertain it. The Court observed that the Appellate Authority's order specifically stated that no document was produced at the time of hearing. The Court found that a mere reference to a screenshot did not substantiate the petitioner's claim that Annexure-P/8 was produced. Furthermore, the Court held that even if Annexure-P/8 had been produced, it could not be relied upon for assessment purposes under the BGST Act. The reasoning for this was twofold: firstly, no such certificate is permissible for assessment under the BGST Act, and secondly, the certificate was issued in the name of Shiv Shankar Singh, not R.P. Construction, which is registered as a proprietorship. Therefore, the Appellate Authority's finding that no document was produced and its subsequent dismissal of the appeal were upheld.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority erred in dismissing the appeal without considering Annexure-P/8, a certificate issued by the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Banka, stating that the proprietor of the petitioner had not performed any contractual work, thereby failing to decide the appeal on merits? 2. Whether Annexure-P/8, a certificate issued by the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Banka, is a valid document for the purpose of assessment under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, especially when it is issued in the name of the proprietor and not the proprietorship firm? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal without considering the merits of the case and specifically failed to consider Annexure-P/8, a crucial document produced before it. Revenue's Contentions: The State argued that the Appellate Authority correctly noted that no document was produced at the time of hearing. They further contended that Annexure-P/8 cannot be relied upon because it was issued in the name of Shiv Shankar Singh and not R.P. Construction, and that such a certificate is not permissible for assessment under the BGST Act. They also pointed out that the return filed by the Executive Engineer could not be revised after November 13, 2021, as per Section 39(9) of the BGST Act, for the assessment year 2019-2020.