Cw/19193/2018 Of vs. Lignite Power PVT. LTD. Vs State Of Rajasthan

Held

The Court held that the respondents are obligated to issue 'C' Forms to the petitioner for the High Speed Diesel procured for use in the generation or distribution of electricity. The Court reasoned that High Speed Diesel is retained within the definition of 'goods' under Section 9 of the GST Act, and the petitioner's registration under Section 7(2) of the CST Act is still valid and has not been cancelled as per the provisions of Section 4 of the CST Act. The Court found no distinguishing factors between the present case and the precedents cited, particularly Carpo Power Limited. Therefore, the refusal to issue 'C' Forms was deemed to be without authority of law. The Court directed that in the event the petitioner had to pay any amount on account of the wrongful refusal to issue 'C' Forms, they shall be entitled to a refund or adjustment from the concerned authorities. These claims are to be processed within twelve weeks of being made in writing with requisite documents.

Facts

The petitioner, Lignite Power Pvt. Ltd., sought a writ directing the respondents, including the State of Rajasthan and the Union of India, to issue 'C' Forms. The petitioner procures High Speed Diesel (HSD) through inter-state trade for use in its power plants. The respondents had allegedly refused to issue 'C' Forms, leading to the petitioner potentially paying excess tax. The petitioner relied on previous judgments, specifically Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. and Carpo Power Limited (supra), which dealt with similar issues concerning the issuance of 'C' Forms for goods used in power generation. The respondents acknowledged the controversy was identical but noted an appeal was admitted against an identical judgment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents are obligated to issue 'C' Forms in respect of High Speed Diesel (HSD) procured by the petitioner for use in the generation or distribution of electricity, considering the amended definition of 'goods' under the GST Act and the continued validity of the petitioner's registration under the CST Act? (Section 9(2) of the GST Act, Section 7(2) of the CST Act, Rule 12 of CST (R&T) Rules). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the controversy is squarely covered by the ratio in Hindustan Zinc Ltd. and Carpo Power Limited. They argued that HSD is included in the amended definition of 'goods' under Section 9 of the GST Act, and no notification has been issued to exclude it. Furthermore, their registration under Section 7(2) of the CST Act remains valid and has not been cancelled, implying an obligation to issue 'C' Forms. They asserted that the usage of 'C' Form should not be restricted solely to resale, but also cover use in manufacturing or processing of goods for sale, including power generation. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents did not dispute the identical nature of the controversy but submitted that an appeal has been admitted by the Division Bench against a similar judgment. They did not present any other substantive arguments against the petitioner's claim.