Jai Prakash Singh vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, Jai Prakash Singh, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Respondent No. 3). The petitioner sought a declaration that these orders were illegal and without jurisdiction. He also prayed for directions to the Assistant Commissioner to issue a DRC-13, and for the Executive Engineer (Respondent No. 2) to pay the full rate of GST, deducting only 2% TDS as per the works contract agreement. The petitioner's grievance stemmed from the alleged non-payment of the full GST rate by the Executive Engineer and pressure from the tax authority for payment, potentially involving the State Bank of India (Respondent No. 4).

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing Respondent No. 2, the Executive Engineer, Kamand Kshetra Vikash Pramandal, Bhabhua Kaimur, Bihar, to consider and decide the petitioner's case. This decision was to be made in terms of the judgment and order dated 05.07.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1452 of 2019 and the letter No. 5405 dated 30.07.2019. The Court explicitly clarified that all issues of facts and law were left open for determination by the Executive Engineer. The Court expressed hope and expectation that the Executive Engineer would decide the petitioner's case expeditiously, preferably within four months from the date of receipt of the Court's order. The Court did not make any specific findings on the legality of the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner or the correctness of the GST payment and TDS deduction by the Executive Engineer, leaving these to the authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the orders contained in Annexure-3 and 9 series, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, are illegal, void, and without jurisdiction? The petitioner contended that the orders were illegal and sought their quashing. The respondents, through the State counsel, submitted that the case was covered by a previous judgment of the High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1452 of 2019 (M/s Jai Bhawani Construction Vs. The Union of India and Ors.) and a subsequent letter dated 30.07.2019. 2. Whether the Executive Engineer, Kamand Kshetra Vikash Pramandal, Bhabhua Kaimur, has paid the full rate of GST, or only deducted 2% TDS of GST on the works value as per the agreement? The petitioner argued that only 2% TDS was deducted, implying the full GST was not paid. The State counsel had no objection to the matter being remanded to the appropriate authority for consideration on its merits. The Court was asked to decide if the petitioner's claim regarding GST payment and TDS deduction was valid under the agreement and GST law.