M/S. Shree Parshwanath Corporation vs. State Of Rajasthan

CW/16381/2019HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC01070762201930 October 2019Bench: DINESH MEHTA2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Shree Parshwanath Corporation, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 17.07.2019. The order pertains to the determination of the rate of tax on dry coconut (copra). The petitioner sought interference from the High Court under its writ jurisdiction. The respondents are the State of Rajasthan and its GST authorities, including the Commissioner of State GST, the Joint Commissioner State GST, and the Deputy Commissioner SGST. The tax period is not explicitly stated. The procedural history indicates that an appeal remedy is available under the Integrated Goods Service Tax Act read with Section 107 of the Central Goods Service Tax Act, 2017.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the impugned order was without jurisdiction, which is a prerequisite for interference under the extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The Court noted that an efficacious remedy by way of appeal is available to the petitioner under the Integrated Goods Service Tax Act read with Section 107 of the Central Goods Service Tax Act, 2017. Furthermore, the Court found that the determination of the tax rate on dry coconut (copra), which was the subject of the impugned order, depended on numerous disputed questions of fact. Consequently, the Court was not inclined to interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition was dismissed, and the stay application was also dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 17.07.2019 is without jurisdiction, warranting interference by the High Court under its extraordinary writ jurisdiction? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the order was without jurisdiction, implying a need for the High Court to intervene. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not explicitly argue on the lack of jurisdiction but highlighted the availability of an efficacious remedy by way of appeal. They also contended that the determination of the tax rate on dry coconut (copra) involves numerous disputed questions of fact, making it unsuitable for writ jurisdiction.

Sections Cited

Section 107

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16381/2019 M/s. Shree Parshwanath Corporation, Branch Office At 11 A Ganesh Market Station Road, Pali, Represented By Its Proprietor Shri Vishal Madhukant Shah, Aged 37 Years Son Of Shri Madhukant Shah. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Commissioner Of State Gst, Kar Bhawan, Jaipur. 2. The Joint Commissioner State Gst, Kar Bhawan, Jodhpur. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Sgst, Circle-A, Hanumangarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Kaswan JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order 30/10/2019 The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 17.07.2019 (Annex.5). Indisputably, an appeal has been provided under the Integrated Good Service Tax Act read with Section 107 of the Central Goods Service Tax Act, 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to show as to how the order impugned is without juri iction, so as to call for interference in extraordinary writ juri iction of this Court. In view of the fact that efficacious remedy, by way of appeal, has been provided and in view of the fact that determination of rate of tax on dry coconut (copra) , impugned in the present writ petition, depends upon numerous disputed

(2 of 2) [CW-16381/2019] questions of facts, this Court is not inclined to interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition, therefore, fails. The stay application also stands dismissed. (DINESH MEHTA),J 231-skm/-

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.