SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Chh) 566

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS, J.
Ultratech Cement Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Writ Petition (T) No. 4 of 2024
Decided on : 19-01-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. M.P. Devnath and Mr. Raja Sharma, Advocates
For the Respondent:Ms. Akanksha Jain, Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate

The availability of an alternate and efficacious remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act rendered the writ petition challenging the order not maintainable.

Headnote:

GST - Challenge to Order dated 26.09.2023 - Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas evam Paryavaran) Upkar Adhiniyam, 2005 - Section 9, 9B, 9C - Summary: The court addressed the challenge to an order confirming a demand for GST and recovery of Goods & Services Tax along with interest and penalty under the Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas evam Paryavaran) Upkar Adhiniyam, 2005. The court discussed the petitioner's contention regarding the absence of supply or consideration to attract GST, and the availability of alternate remedy of appeal under Chapter XVIII of the GST Act, 2017.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the legality, validity, and propriety of an order confirming a demand for GST and recovery of Goods & Services Tax along with interest and penalty under the Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas evam Paryavaran) Upkar Adhiniyam, 2005. The petitioner contended that there was no supply or consideration to attract GST.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's challenge to the order was not maintainable as an alternate remedy of appeal was available under Chapter XVIII of the GST Act, 2017.

Issues: The main issue was whether the writ petition challenging the order was maintainable in view of the alternate remedy of appeal available under the GST Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's challenge to the order was not maintainable as an alternate remedy of appeal was available under Chapter XVIII of the GST Act, 2017.

Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed off, directing the petitioner to take appropriate remedies available under Section 107 of the GST Act.

ORDER :

1. The present petition has been filed by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 26.09.2023 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner (CGST and Central Excise), Raipur in Original Order No. 10/ADC/GST/2023-24.

By the impugned order the Additional Commissioner has confirmed the demand and ordered for recovery of Goods & Services Tax ("GST") of Rs. 14,35,54,944/-(CGST Rs.7,17,77,472/- + SGST Rs.7,17,77,472/-) (Rupees Fourteen Crore Thirty-Five Lakh Fifty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty-Four only) along with applicable interest and penalty on the Development Cess and Environment Cess to be paid under the Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas evam Paryavaran) Upkar Adhiniyam, 2005. The Additional Commissioner has also imposed penalty to the tune of Rs. 1,43,55,494/-. The petitioner has also challenged the demand notice dated 06 December 2023 issued by Assistant Commissioner, Raipur – 3, Division -1 (Annexure P/2). in which levy and collect Goods & Services Tax ("GST") of Rs. 14,35,54,944/- (CGST Rs.7,17,77,472/- + SGST Rs.7,17,77,472/-) (Rupees Fourteen Crore Thirty-Five Lakh Fifty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty-Four only) along with applicable interest and penalty on the Development Cess and Environment Cess payable to the State of Chhattisgarh under the Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas evam Paryavaran) Upkar Adhiniyam, 2005.

2. Brief facts as projected by the petitioner are that the Petitioner is a Public Limited Company duly registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at B-Wing, 2nd floor, Ahura Center, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093. The Cement Plant of the Petitioner company is situated at Post Hirmi, Tehsil, Simga, District Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh) and is engaged in the manufacture and supply of Cement and Clinker. The Petitioner has its own Limestone (Cement Grade) Mines for captive use in the manufacture of cement situated at Paraswani, Baloda Bazar, Chhatisgarh. The Petitioner company has been granted mining leases (in short "ML") for extraction of mineral Limestone (Cement Grade) "Major Mineral" and also "Notified mineral" under Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, as amended from time to time ("MMDR Act")]. This mining lease has provided for all the payments that are required to be made to the State Government in relation to the aforesaid captive mining operation royalty, surface rent, dead rent, water charges. Therefore, against the receipt of mining rights, Petitioner pays a royalty to the State Government under Section 9 (2) of the MMDR Act. Additionally, in terms of Section 9B and 9C of the MMDR Act, the Petitioner also pays charges towards the District Mineral Foundation ('DMF') and National Mineral Exploration Trust ('NMET'), respectively.

3. It has also been contended that Legislature of the State of Chhattisgarh has enacted the Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas Evam Paryavaran) Upkar Adhiniyam, 2005 ('Chhattisgarh Cess Act') which provides for the levy of cess on land for raising funds to implement infrastructure development and environment improvement projects. The Chhattisgarh (Adhosanrachna Vikas Avam Paryavaran) Upkar Niyam, 2005 ('Chhattisgarh Cess Rules') has been framed under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Cess Act. Sr. No. 01 to Schedule I and Schedule II prescribe that the cesses are payable on land covered under the Mining lease at the prescribed rate on each tonne of dispatch of mineral. The prescribed rate is Rupees 11.25 on each tonne of dispatch of mineral (w.e.f. 04.09.2019), i.e., in the present case, limestone. The Petitioner discharges the statutory levy of Infrastructure Development Cess and Environment Cess at the prescribed rate and pays the same to the Chhattisgarh State Government. The Petitioner has paid a total sum of Rs. 79,75,27,468/- towards the Cesses for the period from July 2017 to Septem

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top