M/S. Sri Uma Traders vs. Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes) Patnam Bazar Circle

Held

The Court did not decide on the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Instead, in view of the submission by the learned Government Pleader that no assessment order had been passed by the 1st respondent, and with the agreement of the petitioner's counsel, the Court decided to remit the matter back to the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent was directed to consider all the objections raised by the petitioner and afford a personal hearing before passing an appropriate assessment order expeditiously. The Court noted that the petitioner could pursue suitable legal recourse if aggrieved by the future assessment order. No costs were awarded.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, alleging it to be discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 300-A of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also sought to set aside a summary of demand notice (DRC-07) dated August 26, 2021, issued by the 1st respondent under the Andhra Pradesh Goods & Service Tax Act for the period July 2018 to February 2018. The revenue authorities submitted that no assessment order had been passed yet.

Key Issues

1. Whether Section 16(2)(c) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 300-A of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that Section 16(2)(c) is unconstitutional on grounds of discrimination and violation of fundamental rights. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not explicitly argue on the constitutional validity of the section. Instead, they submitted that no assessment order had been passed, suggesting a procedural stage issue. The revenue agreed to a remission of the matter.