M/S Vasava Engineering PVT.LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Assistant Commissioner Audit
Held
The Court granted permission to the petitioners to withdraw their writ petitions. The liberty was granted to the petitioners to prefer a duly constituted writ petition challenging the vires of sub-rule (2) of Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, together with the amendment in the said Rules. The Court did not decide on the merits of the challenge to the vires of the said rule. The reasoning for granting permission was based on the petitioners' request. The ratio decidendi, in this context, is that a High Court can permit withdrawal of a writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one on the same grounds, especially when the challenge is to the vires of a statutory provision. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petitions as withdrawn with the granted liberty.
Facts
Multiple petitioners, including Mosh Varaya Infrastructure Limited, M/s Vasava Engineering Pvt. Ltd., M/s Vasava Engineering Construction, M/s Avinash Developers Pvt. Ltd., and M/s Dilip Construction Company, filed writ petitions before the Chhattisgarh High Court. The respondents were various authorities under the Central GST and Central Excise departments. The specific tax periods and amounts in dispute are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates these were writ petitions filed before the High Court.
Key Issues
1. Whether sub-rule (2) of Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, and its subsequent amendment are ultra vires the Constitution of India. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners sought permission to withdraw their writ petitions with the liberty to file a fresh, duly constituted writ petition challenging the vires of sub-rule (2) of Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, along with the amendment to the said Rules. This implies the petitioners intended to argue that the said rule and its amendment were beyond the legislative competence or otherwise invalid. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state in response to the petitioners' request to withdraw and refile. The focus is on the petitioners' request and the court's decision on it.
Sections Cited
Rule 5A(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 203 of 2018 Mosh Varaya Infrastructure Limited 1st Floor, 52, Mahalaxmi Cloth Market, Pandari, Raipur- 492004, Chhattisgarh Through Saurabh Rathi, S/o Kamal Kishore Rathi, Aged 36 Years, R/o House No. H-5, Anupam Nagar, Near TV Tower, Post Shankar Nagar, Raipur-492007, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus Principal Commissioner, Central Gst And Central Excise Central Excise Building, Dhamtari Road, Tikrapara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent WPT No. 165 of 2014 M/s Vasava Engineering Pvt.Ltd. 113 Friends Arcade Shastri Nagar, P.O. Supela Bhilai Distt. Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus Union Of India Through The Assistant Commissioner (Audit)
Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Central Excise Hqrs.
Tikrapara, Dhamtari Road, Raipur (CG) 492 001 ---- Respondent WPT No. 166 of 2014 M/s Vasava Engineering Construction 113, Friends Arcade, Shastri Nagar, PO Supela, Bhilai, Distt Durg 490023 (CG) ---- Petitioner Versus Union Of India Through The Assistant Commissioner (Audit)
Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Central Excise Hqrs.
Tikrapara, Dhamtari Road Raipur |(
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 Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.