Allowed

M/S Shiv Coal Trading Company v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2018WTAX/1509/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the demand for registration fees under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 for coal movement within UP. The court held that such fees are beyond respondent authority following the Division Bench precedent in M/s. Akansha Enterprises, allowing the petition without registration obligations.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is not required to obtain registration for movement of coal within UP and any registration fee charged must be returned.

M/S Shiv Coal Trading Company Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1509 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S Shiv Coal Trading Company Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyan Prakash Shrivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri G.P.Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C. B. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel.

¶6

The petitioner has challenged, in these proceedings, the action of the respondents in requiring the payment of registration fees allegedly under the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927.

¶7

The petitioner claims to be engaged in the business of purchase and sale of coal. The contention of the petitioner is that he is not liable to pay the registration fees.

¶8

The issue before the Court is not res integra but is governed by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in M/s. Akansha Enterprises Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., VSTI 2012 (Vol.13) B- 256 . The Division Bench held as follows:-

¶9

"On the aforesaid facts and circumstances the insistence for registration and for charging the registration fees is beyond the authority conferred upon the respondents under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the Rules of 1978."

¶10

The operative directions that were issued by the Division Bench were in the following terms:-

¶11

"Both the writ petitions are allowed to the extent that the petitioners will not be required to obtain registration for movement of coal within the State of UP. If any registration fee is charged from the petitioners, the same shall be returned to them. They will, however, continue to obtain transit passes and pay transit fee on the transportation /movement of coal, held to be forest produce in NTPC Ltd. (supra), in accordance with the U.P. Transit of Timber and other Forest Produce Rules, 1978."

¶12

These directions were followed by another Division Bench of this Court on 18 December 2012 in M/S. Balaji Coal Supplier Vs. State of U.P. & Ors (WRIT TAX No. - 1341 of 2012).

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel could not point out any distinguishing feature.

¶14

In the circumstances and respectfully following the earlier judgement, we allow the writ petition in the same terms and directions as mentioned in the judgement and order dated 8th December, 2011 of the Division Bench in M/s Akanksha Enterprises (supra).

¶15

The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 29.11.2018 JK Yadav

M/S Shiv Coal Trading Company v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Shiv Coal Trading Company v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Doon/ Diesel Sales and Service Vs Union of India and Another

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mansha Bind Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mahaveer Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Rajiv Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar Yadav Vs Union of India and 4 Others