Pepsico INDIA Holdings PVT. LTD. vs. The Union Of INDIA

Facts

PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (the Petitioner) filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. The Petitioner sought various reliefs, including a declaration that Notification No. 75/2019-Central Tax dated 26.12.2019, which inserted Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, was illegal, arbitrary, and ultra vires the Constitution. Additionally, the Petitioner challenged a debit entry with reference no. BL1002200000223 dated 11.02.2020 made by Respondent No. 2 (Deputy Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise Division - Patna (West)), and sought its reversal. The Petitioner also sought to quash an impugned notice dated 03.03.2020 issued by Respondent No. 2. The respondents were the Union of India, the Deputy Commissioner, and the Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Patna.

Held

The Petitioner sought permission to withdraw the present petition. The Court granted the permission. Consequently, the instant petition was disposed of as withdrawn. No specific findings were made by the Court on the legality or arbitrariness of the notification, the debit entry, or the impugned notice, as the matter was not adjudicated on merits. The Court did not delve into the constitutional validity of Rule 86A or the procedural correctness of the actions taken by the respondents. The operative directions were limited to allowing the withdrawal of the petition and disposing of it accordingly. No issues were expressly left undecided as the petition was withdrawn before any substantive arguments were heard or decisions rendered.

Key Issues

1. Whether Notification No. 75/2019-Central Tax dated 26.12.2019, inserting Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, is illegal, arbitrary, and ultra vires the Constitution. The Petitioner argued that the said notification and rule were beyond the legislative competence of the delegated authority and violated fundamental rights. 2. Whether the debit entry with reference no. BL1002200000223 dated 11.02.2020 made by Respondent No. 2 is illegal and arbitrary. The Petitioner contended that this debit entry was made without proper procedure and justification. 3. Whether the impugned notice dated 03.03.2020 issued by Respondent No. 2 should be quashed. The Petitioner argued that the notice was based on an illegal debit entry and lacked legal basis. The Revenue did not present any arguments as the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition.