Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3038/2024
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
REPRESENTED BY MANOJ KUMAR DEKA, SECRETARY, A.S.E.B. CAMPUS
DWARANDHAR BIDYUT NIYAMAT BHAWAN, SIXTH MILE GUWAHATI
ASSAM-22
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI
2:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER
GUWAHATI
O/O GST BHAWAN
MACHKHOWA
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-01
3:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER
CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
GST BHAWAN
KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
4:THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
NEW DELHI
5:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
INVESTIGATION
O/O THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
INTELLIGENCE
H.NO. 77
WARD NO. 54
OPPOSITE SRIMANTA SANKARDEVAKALAKSHETRA
PANJABARI MAIN ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-37
6:THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CGST
C.EX AND CUSTOMS
MACHKHOWA
KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S K SAHA, MS. N GOGOI,MS. N HAWELIA,MS. M L GOPE
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. S C KEYAL (R-5),MS. N KAKATI (R-5),K JAIN (R-5),SC, GST
Linked Case : WP(C)/4842/2022
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
ASEB CAMPUS
DWARANDHAR BIDYUT NIYAMAT BHAWAN
SIXTH MILE
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-22
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
NEW DELHI
2:SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER
O/O THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
INTELLIGENCE
H.N. 77
WARD O. -54
OPPOSITE SRIMANTA SANKARDEVA KALAKSHETRA
PANJABARI
MAIN ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASAM-37
3:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
O/O THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
INTELLIGENCE
H.N. 77
WARD O. -54
OPPOSITE SRIMANTA SANKARDEVA KALAKSHETRA
PANJABARI
MAIN ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASAM-37
4:HE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER
CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
GST BHAWAN
KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
5:THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
NEW DELHI
------------
Advocate for : MS. N HAWELIA
Advocate for : ASSTT.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
Linked Case : WP(C)/4841/2022
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
ASEB CAMPUS
DWARANDHAR BIDYUT NIYAMAT BHAWAN
SIXTH MILE
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-22
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
NEW DELHI
2:SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER
O/O THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
INTELLIGENCE
H.N. 77
WARD O. -54
OPPOSITE SRIMANTA SANKARDEVA KALAKSHETRA
PANJABARI
MAIN ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASAM-37
3:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
O/O THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
INTELLIGENCE
H.N. 77
WARD O. -54
OPPOSITE SRIMANTA SANKARDEVA KALAKSHETRA
PANJABARI
MAIN ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASAM-37
4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER
CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
GST BHAWAN
KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
5:THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
NEW DELHI
------------
Advocate for : MS. M L GOPE
Advocate for : ASSTT.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
Linked Case : WP(C)/4376/2023
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
ASEB CAMPUS DWARANDHAR BIDYUT NIYAMAT BHAWAN SIXTH MILE
GUWAHATI ASSAM 22
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE REP .BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF
FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA NEW DELHI
2:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER GUWAHATI
O/O GST BHAWAN MACHKOWA GUWAHATI ASSAM 1
3:THE PRICNIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER
CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX GST BHAWAN KEDAR
ROAD GUWAHATI ASSAM
4:THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
NEW DELHI
5:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
INVESTIGATION
O/O THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
INTELLIGENCE H N 77 WARD NO. 54 OPPOSITE SRIMANTA SANKARDEVE
KALAKSHETRA PANJABARI MANI ROAD GUWAHATI ASSAM 37
------------
Advocate for : MS. M L GOPE
Advocate for : SC
GST appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
29.04.2026
ORDER
Heard Ms. M L Gope, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Senior Counsel/Standing Counsel assisted by Dr. B N Gogoi and Mr. K. Jain for the respondent Nos.2 to 6 (GST).
2. These writ petitions, namely W.P.(C) Nos. 4841/2022, 4842/2022, 4376/2023 and 3038/2024, involve a common issue and are, accordingly, taken up together for final disposal. The challenges raised in the respective writ petitions are as follows:
(i) In W.P.(C) No. 4841/2022, the petitioner challenges the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice dated 28.04.2022 issued under the Finance Act, 1994 for the period 2016–2017, along with the adjudication order passed pursuant thereto;
(ii) In W.P.(C) No. 4842/2022, the petitioner challenges the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice dated 28.04.2022 issued under the Finance Act, 1994 for the period 2017–2018, along with the adjudication order passed pursuant thereto;
(iii) In W.P.(C) No. 4376/2023, the petitioner challenges the Final Adjudication Order dated 27.02.2023 passed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 covering the periods July 2017–2018, 2018–2019, 2019–2020, 2020–2021, 2021–2022 and 2022–2023; and
(iv) In W.P.(C) No. 3038/2024, the petitioner challenges the appellate order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, C.Ex. & Customs, Guwahati, affirming the levy under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the aforesaid periods.
3. Since the issue arising in all the writ petitions is identical, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.
4. The impugned proceedings seek to subject the petitioner’s statutory regulatory commissions discharging quasi-judicial functions to levy of service tax/GST.
5. The core issue is whether the functions discharged by a statutory regulatory commission, being quasi-judicial in nature, are exigible to service tax/GST.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue is no longer res integra and stands concluded by judicial pronouncements of various High Courts, affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
7. The Delhi High Court, in Central Electricity Regulatory Commission v. Additional Director, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) & Anr., in WP(C) No. 10680 of 2024 and C.M. Appl. No. 43919 of 2024 (Stay), by judgment dated 15.01.2025, held, allowing the writ petitions, that the regulatory functions discharged by the Electricity Regulatory Commissions, including tariff determination and licensing, are statutory in nature and cannot be construed as activities undertaken in the course or furtherance of ‘business’ within the meaning of section 2(17) read with section 7 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The fees collected for such functions do not constitute consideration for a taxable supply. Further, having regard to the quasi-judicial character of the Commissions, their functions fall within the exclusion under Schedule III relating to services by courts and tribunals, and no artificial bifurcation between adjudicatory and regulatory functions is permissible. The attempt of the Department to classify such activities, as ‘support services’ cannot override the statutory exclusion. Consequently, the show-cause notices seeking to levy GST on regulatory fees having held unsustainable in law, the Delhi High Court set aside and quashed the same.
8. The aforesaid judgment has attained finality upon dismissal of SLP (Civil) Diary No. 32626/2025 on 21.07.2025, and the Review Petition (Civil) Diary No. 6956/2026 on 10.03.2026.
9. The Karnataka High Court, in Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission v. Joint Commissioner, Central Tax, Bengaluru & Ors. in (2026) 154 GSTR 472 (Karn), and the Himachal Pradesh High Court, in Himachal Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission v. Union of India & Ors. in MANU/HP/0056/2026, have taken a consistent view.
10. The legal position that emerges is:
(i) A regul
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
