Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Jharkhand Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board., through its Secretary namely Rakesh Prasad, S/o. Late Krishna Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Anvil Cables Private Limited a Private Limited, through its constituted Attorney, Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, son of Shri Ravindra Nath Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
Prayer Since all the appeals are having the common issues, as such, these appeals are directed to be heard together and are being disposed of with this common order.
2. The instant appeals preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent are directed against the order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Review Nos.22 of 2024 and analogous cases, whereby and whereunder, the prayer to recall/review the orders passed by the learned Single Judge on different dates, i.e., in W.P.(C) Nos.5775 of 2023, 5777 of 2023, 5776 of 2023, 5778 of 2023, 6695 of 2023, 6262 of 2022 and 5458 of 2023 have been dismissed.
3. Since the issue involved in all these Letters Patent Appeals are identical in nature, as such, for the sake of convenience and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the fact involved in one of the cases, i.e., LPA No.497 of 2024 is being taken up.
Factual Matrix
4. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the petition, required to be enumerated, which read as under:
(i) It is the case of the writ petitioner that writ petitioner is a Company engaged in business of workers contract of the G
The Labour Cess cannot be deducted from supply contracts under the Cess Act, as established by statutory provisions and relevant case law.
The court held that non-joinder of a necessary party does not invalidate proceedings if no prejudice is shown, emphasizing the limited scope of review jurisdiction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the labour cess is not leviable on the supply of materials and consultancy charges under the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare ....
The court evaluates the involvement of the welfare board in legal proceedings concerning unjust enrichment, clarifying the necessity of establishing locus in absence of a direct contractual relations....
The executive must comply with judicial orders and cannot deny claims based on non-party status in prior litigation, as Supreme Court rulings are binding on all similarly situated parties.
Refund of service tax on exempt services barred by unjust enrichment if contract inclusive of tax and incidence passed on; refund proceedings cannot modify self-assessments.
(1) Cess could only be recovered in the manner stipulated in Cess Act and Rules framed thereunder.(2) A contractor who enters into a pure Supply Contract is statutorily exempted from levy under BOCW ....
Disputed claims for refund of cess on royalty must be resolved in civil courts, not through writ petitions, as they involve complex factual determinations.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
