Kk Gupta Constructions PVT.LTD. vs. State Of Rajasthan
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Kk Gupta Constructions Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur. The petitioner contended that the controversy in their case was identical to a previous writ petition decided by a coordinate bench on May 18, 2018. The respondent, State of Rajasthan (Commercial Taxes Department), agreed that the controversy was identical. The core issue revolved around the issuance of 'C' forms for High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade. The petitioner argued that the respondents were obligated to issue these forms, as High Speed Diesel is considered 'goods' under Section 9 of the GST Act, and their registration under Section 7(2) was valid.
Held
The Court held that the respondents are liable to issue 'C' forms in respect of High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade. The reasoning was that High Speed Diesel, along with other specified items like petroleum crude and motor spirit, is retained under Section 9 of the GST Act while defining 'goods'. Furthermore, the petitioner's registration under Section 7(2) of the Act was valid and had not been cancelled, and could only be cancelled within the parameters of Section 4 of the CST Act. The Court found no distinction between the petitioner's case and the precedent case of Carpo Power Limited. The operative directions were that the respondents must issue 'C' forms. If the petitioner had paid any amount due to the wrongful refusal to issue 'C' forms, they are entitled to a refund or adjustment from the concerned authorities, who must process such claims within twelve weeks of written submission and furnishing of requisite documents.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondents are liable to issue 'C' forms in respect of High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade, considering it is classified as 'goods' under Section 9 of the GST Act and the petitioner's registration under Section 7(2) is valid. (Question of law) Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the case was squarely covered by a previous order of the High Court in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5506/2018. They contended that High Speed Diesel is included in the definition of 'goods' under Section 9 of the GST Act, and their registration under Section 7(2) remains valid and can only be cancelled under Section 4 of the CST Act. Therefore, the respondents have a duty to issue 'C' forms. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent agreed that the controversy was identical to the previously decided writ petition and did not present any distinct arguments.
Sections Cited
Section 9, Section 7(2), Section 4
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Judgment / Order 18/07/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 18.5.2018 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petition led by S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5506/2018 and thus, the writ petition may be decided in the same terms. Shri Bhagirath Patel associate to Shri Anil Bhansali Advocate representing the respondent Commercial Taxes Department appears and states that the controversy involved in this writ petition is identical to the controversy involved in the above writ petition and thus, the writ petition may be decided in the same terms. The operative portion of the order dated 18.5.2018 is reproduced hereinbelow :- In the present case too, the Parliament has retained high speed diesel along with petroleum crude, motor spirit, natural gas, aviation turbine fuel
(2 of 2) [CW-9786/2018] and alcoholic liquor for human consumption crude which have been specifically mentioned in Section 9 of the GST Act while defining the ‘goods’. Besides, the registration under Section 7(2) of the Act is still valid and has not been cancelled and can be cancelled only within the parameters of Section 4 of the CST Act. Hence, this Court finds that it is obligatory duty of the respondents to issue ‘C’ form to the petitioner – company and any failure on the part of the respondents to do so is without any authority of law. Thus, this Court finds nothing to distinguish the case of the petitioners herein from that of the petitioner in the case of Carpo Power Limited (supra). Accordingly, the present writ petitions are allowed in the same terms as Corpo Power Limited (supra). It is held that the respondents are liable to issue `C' Forms in respect of the High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade. In the event of the petitioners having had to pay any amount on account of the respondents wrongful refusal to issue `C' Forms the petitioners shall be entitled to refund and/or adjustment of the same from the concerned authorities who collected the excess tax. The concerned authorities shall process such a claim within twelve weeks of the same being made by the petitioners in writing and the petitioners
furnishing
the requisite documents/form. As the dispute is identical on all fours, the instant writ petition is allowed in the same terms. Stay application is disposed of. No order as to costs. (SANDEEP MEHTA),J /tarun goyal/ 83
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.