Saptarshi And Anr. vs. Dy. Com. Of State Tax, Bureau Of Investigation, S. Bengal Hq And Ors.

Facts

The petitioners, Saptarshi & Anr., filed a writ petition seeking a direction against their contractors, respondent nos. 5 and 6, to pay the amount of GST in question to the petitioners. This prayer was unrelated to any dispute between the petitioners and the respondent/WBGST Authority. The petitioners essentially sought to compel third parties to fulfill their tax and penalty obligations to the State GST Authority. The writ petition was filed before the Calcutta High Court.

Held

The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The reasoning was that the petitioners were seeking a direction upon third persons (their contractors) to make payment of tax and penalty to the respondent State GST Authority. The Court noted that such an obligation on the contractors arose out of a contract. Therefore, the Court concluded that this was not a matter for writ jurisdiction. The ratio decidendi is that writ jurisdiction is not the appropriate forum to enforce contractual obligations of third parties to pay taxes to the revenue. The writ petition was dismissed, but the dismissal was explicitly stated not to be a bar to the petitioners availing any alternative remedy available to them against respondent no. 8.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should issue a direction upon third-party contractors (respondent nos. 5 and 6) to pay GST and penalty amounts to the State GST Authority, when such an obligation arises from a contract between the petitioners and the contractors. Contentions: Petitioner: The petitioners sought a direction for their contractors to pay the GST amount. (The judgment does not record specific legal arguments or reliance on authorities by the petitioners for this prayer). State/Revenue: The State GST Authority was the respondent, and the court considered the nature of the prayer made by the petitioners.