Ashish Kumar Goyal vs. State Of Rajasthan

Held

The Court held that the right of the petitioners to avail statutory remedies, such as filing replies to show cause notices or appeals against final assessment orders, remains unaffected by the writ petition's outcome. Regarding the demand of GST on royalty, the Court found that this issue was concluded by the judgment dated 27.09.2022 in Sudershan Lal Gupta vs UOI & Ors. and connected matters. However, concerning the demand of GST on DMFT contribution, the Court permitted the petitioners in ten specific writ petitions to pursue this relief while denying relief on the imposition of GST on royalty. Consequently, ten writ petitions were deferred for consideration of the DMFT issue, while the remaining petitions were dismissed in light of the Sudershan Lal Gupta judgment.

Facts

A batch of writ petitions challenged show cause notices and assessment orders issued by the GST Department demanding GST on royalty paid by the petitioners to the Mining Department for their mining leases. In ten specific writ petitions, an additional issue regarding the demand of royalty on contribution to the District Mineral Foundation Trust (DMFT) was also raised. The petitioners argued that a previous Division Bench judgment by the Jaipur Bench, in Sudershan Lal Gupta vs Union of India & Ors., incorrectly dismissed similar petitions by relying on unrelated cases concerning service tax on royalty, thereby frustrating their right to argue the merits of their GST demands. The respondents contended that the identical challenge to GST on royalty had already been rejected by a Coordinate Bench.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners' right to agitate against the show cause notices on merits has been frustrated by the judgment in Sudershan Lal Gupta (supra), which dismissed petitions challenging GST on royalty based on prior judgments concerning service tax on royalty? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners argued that the Sudershan Lal Gupta judgment was wrongly decided as it relied on cases dealing with service tax on royalty, which is distinct from the current GST on royalty issue. They contended that this led to an adjudication on merits being denied, causing them prejudice. Respondent's Argument: The respondents argued that as a Coordinate Bench had already dismissed identical challenges to the demand of GST on royalty in the Sudershan Lal Gupta case, these writ petitions should also be dismissed. 2. Whether the demand of GST on DMFT contribution is to be considered separately from the demand of GST on royalty?