Kishnaram Ramrakh Vpo Purabsar vs. Union Of INDIA

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 noted that this issue was concluded by the judgment dated 27.09.2022 in Sudershan Lal Gupta vs UOI & Ors. and connected matters. For the issue concerning the demand of GST on DMFT contribution, the Court permitted the petitioners in ten specific writ petitions (Nos. 6368/2022, 6370/2022, 6373/2022, 6513/2022, 7801/2022, 8629/2022, 8671/2022, 10681/2022, 8407/2022, and 8492/2022) to continue pursuing this relief, while denying relief against the imposition of GST on royalty. Consequently, these ten petitions were deferred for consideration of the DMFT issue, and the remaining batch of writ petitions was 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 mining leaseholders to the Mining Department. In ten specific petitions, an additional issue regarding the demand of royalty on contributions to the District Mineral Foundation Trust (DMFT) was also raised. The petitioners argued that a previous Division Bench judgment at the Jaipur Bench, in Sudershan Lal Gupta vs Union of India & Ors., which dismissed similar petitions, did not adjudicate on the merits and was based on unrelated precedents concerning service tax. They contended this prejudiced their right to argue the current matter on its merits. The respondents argued that the identical challenge to GST on royalty had already been dismissed 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 Division Bench judgment in Sudershan Lal Gupta (supra), which dismissed similar writ petitions without adjudication on merits, relying on earlier Division Bench orders concerning service tax on royalty? (Question of law) 2. Whether the demand of GST on royalty paid by writ petitioners to the respondent Mining Department towards their respective mining leases is liable to be sustained? (Question of law) 3. Whether the demand of royalty on contribution to DMFT is liable to be sustained? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioners argued that the judgment in Sudershan Lal Gupta (supra) was not on merits and relied on different precedents (Udaipur Chambers of Commerce and Industry & Ors. Vs. The Union of India & Anr., M/s Mateshwari Minerals & Anr. vs Union of India & Anr., M/s Shivalik Silica Vs. Union of India & Ors., and Rajasthan Small Mines (Cheja Patthar) Lease Holders Association Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) dealing with service tax, not GST, on royalty. They asserted that this dismissal prejudiced their right to argue the present GST issue on merits. Respondent's Contentions: The respondents contended that a Coordinate Bench had already dismissed identical challenges to the demand of GST on royalty in its judgment dated 27.09.2022, and therefore, these writ petitions should also be rejected.