Disposed

Calcom Cement India Limited v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Aug 2022WP(C)/2865/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gujarat High Court disposed of the writ petition holding that the rejection of the petitioner's application for a special GST rate on limitation grounds must be set aside in light of the North East Hi-tech judgment, which held limitation inapplicable for the relevant period. The court directed reconsideration on merit.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioner's application directed to be considered on merit; no coercive action till completion.

Calcom Cement India Limited Vs the Union of India and 4… — GST and Indirect Tax | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010076262021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2865/2021

¶5

CALCOM CEMENT INDIA LIMITED

¶6

(CEMENT GRINDING UNIT) VILL. PIPALPUKHURI, P.O. LANKA, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM 788931 A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 3RD AND 4TH FLOOR, ANIL PLAZA-II, ABC, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI 781005 ASSAM REPRESENTED BY SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR PERIWAL THE SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER (FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS) OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPTT. OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110001

¶10

2:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

¶11

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD FANCY BAZAR GUWAHATI 781001

¶12

3:ASSTT. COMMISSIONER

¶13

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX GUWAHATI II DIVISION GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD FANCY BAZAR GUWAHATI 781001

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

4:CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

¶16

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPTT. OF REVENUE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001

¶17

5:THE AGM/BRANCH MANAGER

¶18

STATE BANK OF INDIA COMMERCIAL BRANCH GUWAHATI 3RD FLOOR SWAGOTA SQUARE G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI 78100

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. A SARAF

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST

¶21

BEFORE

¶22

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 12/08/2022

¶25

Heard Dr. A. Saraf, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned counsel representing the GST authorities.

¶26

This writ petition has been filed inter-alia assailing the order dated 09/04/2021 (Annexure-20) passed by the Principal Commissioner i.e. the respondent no. 2 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner seeking special rate by holding that the same was barred by limitation.

¶27

By referring to a decision of this Court rendered in the case of North East Hi-tech Vs. Union of India [WP(c) 740/2022] by order dated 13/05/2022 passed by the learned Single Judge, Dr. Saraf submits that the matter is covered by the judgement of this Court wherein, it was held that limitation was not applicable for the relevant period and, therefore, the application submitted by the

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

writ petitioner before the respondent no. 3 on 04/02/2021 deserves to be considered on merit.

¶30

Mr. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST has also submitted in his usual fairness that in view

¶31

of the decision in the case of North East Hi-tech (supra) , the application of the petitioner has to be considered on merit.

¶32

If that be so, nothing survives for adjudication in this case. As such, this writ petition is disposed of by providing that the application submitted by the petitioner on 04/02/2021 be considered by the respondent no.2 on merit and dispose of with a reasoned order.

¶33

Facilitating the above, the impugned order dated 09/04/2021 is hereby set aside. It is also provided that until such time, the exercise as directed by this Court is carried out and completed in accordance with law, no coercive action shall be initiated against the petitioner for recovery of the amount involved in this proceeding.

¶34

With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

sukhamay

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Calcom Cement India Limited v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Calcom Cement India Limited v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

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

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and 9 Ors. Vs Bineet Pandey

M/S North East Organised Floritech Private Limited and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

M/S North East Organised Floritech Private Limited and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Khajur Begum Vs the Punjab National Bank and Anr.

Chandana Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

M/S Aditi Industries Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.