M/S North East Glass Industries vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors.

WP(C)/4945/2018HC GauhatiGSTCNR GAHC01016090201829 July 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Held

The Court held that in view of the submissions made by both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Solicitor General for the respondents, the matter should be remanded back to the respondents. The respondents are directed to rework the calculation provided at annexure-9 of the writ petition. This recalculation must be done strictly in terms of the two judgments mentioned: the High Court's judgment dated 01.12.2016 in WP(C) No. 269/16 and the Supreme Court's order dated 07.12.2015 in I.A No. 3/15. The Court did not decide on the merits of the calculation itself but facilitated a re-examination by the concerned authorities.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s North East Glass Industries, filed a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court. Their grievance was that the Central Excise Duty refund due to them had not been correctly calculated. The petitioner contended that the calculation was not in accordance with a judgment and order dated 01.12.2016 passed by the High Court in WP(C) No. 269/16, and an order dated 07.12.2015 by the Supreme Court in I.A No. 3/15. The petitioner specifically referred to a table at annexure-9 of the writ petition to illustrate the alleged miscalculation. The petitioner requested that the matter be remanded back to the respondents for recalculation.

Key Issues

1. Whether the calculation of the Central Excise Duty refund due to the petitioner was correctly made in terms of the High Court's judgment dated 01.12.2016 in WP(C) No. 269/16 and the Supreme Court's order dated 07.12.2015 in I.A No. 3/15. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the calculation of the refund was incorrect and not in consonance with the aforementioned judgments. They relied on a table at annexure-9 of the writ petition to demonstrate the discrepancy and sought a remand for proper calculation. Revenue's Contention: The learned Solicitor General appearing for the respondents agreed with the petitioner's submission that the matter should be remanded back to the respondents for necessary action.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010160902018 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C) 4945/2018 1:M/S NORTH EAST GLASS INDUSTRIES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER THE PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932 AND HAVING ITS OFFICE AT KATONIPARA BALAPATHAR, MODARTOLA, DEUDUAR, RAMPUR (R), ASSAM- 781101, REP. BY SRI RISHAB BAJAJ. VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 2:THE COMMISSIONER GST CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI -05 ASSAM. 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GST (EARLIER DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX) BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-05 ASSAM 4:SUPERINTENDENT GST (EARLIER SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX) RANGIA RANGE ASSA Page No.# 2/2 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M L GOPE Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO

Date : 30-07-2018 Heard Ms. M. L. Gope, learned counsel appe

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.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

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.