M/S. Sidhnath Construction vs. The State Of Bihar
Facts
The petitioner, M/S. Sidhnath Construction, challenged an assessment order dated 16.12.2020 passed under Section 62 of the Bihar Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner had filed an appeal against this order, but it was dismissed on 12.12.2022 due to being filed beyond the prescribed time limit under Section 107(4) of the same Act. Consequently, the petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to challenge the assessment order.
Held
The Court acknowledged that a writ petition challenging an assessment order is generally not permissible when a statutory appeal mechanism exists and has been dismissed. However, the Court noted the issuance of Notification No. 06/2023 dated 31.03.2023 by the Central Government, based on GST Council recommendations. This notification provides for filing a return in certain circumstances, which would necessitate a redone assessment. The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to comply with the provisions of this notification. The ratio decidendi is that in exceptional circumstances, particularly when a new beneficial notification is issued, a High Court may permit a party to avail of its benefits even if the statutory remedy has been exhausted or dismissed, to ensure a just outcome.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can entertain a challenge to an assessment order when a statutory appeal mechanism exists, and the appeal has already been dismissed on grounds of delay? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner is before the High Court challenging the assessment order. (No specific arguments are recorded for the petitioner regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, other than their presence before the court). Revenue's contention: The revenue implicitly argues that a writ petition is not permissible when a statutory appeal has been dismissed. (No specific arguments are recorded for the revenue regarding the maintainability of the writ petition).
Sections Cited
Section 62, Section 107(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Juri iction Case No.1500 of 2023 ====================================================== M/S. Sidhnath Construction Office at Amra Sohaipur, P.S. Mufassil, District- Gaya, through its Partner Pramod Singh, Gender- male, aged about- 52 years, Son of Sideshwar Singh, Resident of Amra, Sohaipur, P.S. Mufassil, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus
The State of Bihar.
The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Bihar, Patna.
The Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Magadh Division, Gaya.
The Joint Commissioner, State Tax, Gaya Circle, Gaya.
The Additional Commissioner, State Tax Gaya Circle, Gaya.
The Assistant Commissioner, State Tax Gaya Circle, Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar (SC-11) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 20-04-2023 The assessment order u
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 Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.