Pranjit Saikia vs. Project Director, Project Implement Unit , Jica And 4 Ors.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could not be entertained. It reasoned that the core grievance of the petitioner was against his tenant for failing to deposit the GST collected, which constituted a civil dispute between the landlord and tenant. The Court found no grievance against the GST authorities that would warrant intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution. Therefore, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the competent forum, including the civil court, for redressal of his grievance. The Court also noted that the petitioner had submitted a representation to Respondent No. 3 (Commissioner of Taxes, Assam), and it was for Respondent No. 3 to pass necessary orders on that representation. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.
Facts
The petitioner, Pranjit Saikia, is a landlord who rented out a portion of his building to Respondent No. 1, Project Director, Project Implement Unit, JICA. As per their agreement, Respondent No. 1 was to pay GST on the rent. The petitioner alleges that Respondent No. 1 deducted the GST amount from the rent but failed to deposit it with the GST authorities. This prevented the petitioner from filing his returns. The petitioner stated he had no grievance against the GST authorities but against his tenant. He filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus directing the tenant to deposit the recovered GST.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can entertain a dispute that is essentially a civil dispute between a landlord and a tenant regarding the deposit of GST collected by the tenant. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus to compel the tenant to deposit the GST deducted from the rent to the GST authorities, as this prevented him from filing his returns. He claimed his grievance was against the tenant's failure to deposit the collected tax. Revenue/State's argument: The respondents, including the GST authorities and the State of Assam, were implicitly arguing that the dispute was not a matter for writ jurisdiction as it was a private civil dispute. The Court's observations suggest no specific arguments were made by the revenue authorities beyond the nature of the dispute.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010229572019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C) 7125/2019 1:PRANJIT SAIKIA S/O- LT PREMESHWAR SAIKIA, R/O- SAIKIA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, SREE NAGAR, G.S.ROAD, GHY-05 (ASSAM)
VERSUS 1:PROJECT DIRECTOR, PROJECT IMPLEMENT UNIT , JICA AND 4 ORS. FOUNDED GUWAHATI WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS, SAIKIA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, (3RD FLOOR), BLOCK-B, SREE NAGAR, G.S.ROAD, GHY-05, (ASSAM) 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX GUWAHATI DEPT. OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD MACHKHOWA GHY-01 (ASSAM) 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAWAN G.S.ROAD GANESHGURI DISPUR GHY-06 4:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ASSAM SACHIVALAYA DISPUR
Page No.# 2/3 GHY-06 5:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D SAHU Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S C KEYAL
B E F O R E HON’BL
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.