Disposed

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC9 Aug 2016CWJC/5301/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court declared that whether goods sold by the petitioner attract tax at 5% or 13.5% is a question of fact. The court refrained from exercising writ jurisdiction and disposed of the applications with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the alternative statutory remedy.

What did the court decide?

The writ applications were disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy.

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr. — GST and Indirect Tax | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4618 of 2016

¶3

=========================================================== Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd., a Company incorporated under the Companies Act having its registered office at 3rd Floor, I Think Techno Campus, Pokhran Road No. 2, Thane, P.O. + P.S. Thane, Mumbai, Maharasthra and Branch office at F1, 1st Floor, Gitanjali Palace, Jamal Road, P.O. Jamal Road, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, Patna through its Asstt. Manager (Accounts), Mukesh Kumar, Son of Sri Lal Babu Prasad, Kaimashikoh, Behind Electricity Office, Patna City, P.O. Jhauganj, P.S. Chowk, District - Patna

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar having its office at Vikas Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

¶7

Commercial Taxes Officer, Patliputra Circle, Patna

¶8

.... .... Respondent/s

¶9

with

¶10

===========================================================

¶11

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5301 of 2016

¶12

===========================================================

¶13

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd., a Company incorporated under the Companies Act having its registered office at 3rd Floor, I Think Techno Campus, Pokhran Road No. 2, Thane, P.O. + P.S. Thane, Mumbai, Maharashtra and Branch Office at F1, 1st Floor, Gitanjali Palace, Jamal Road, P.O. Jamal Road, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, Patna through its Asstt. Manager (Accounts), Mukesh Kumar, son of Sri Lal Babu Prasad, Kaimashikoh, Behind Electricity Office, Patna City, P.O. Jahuganj, P.S. Chowk, District - Patna.

¶14

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶15

Versus

¶16

The State of Bihar through Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar having its office at Vikas Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

¶17

Commercial Taxes Officer, Patliputra Circle, Patna.

¶18

.... .... Respondent/s

¶19

===========================================================

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.4618 of 2016 dt.09-08-2016

¶21

2/3

¶22

Appearance :

¶23

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. D.V.Pathy, Advocate.

¶24

Mrs. Manju Jha, Advocate.

¶25

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar, S.C.11

¶26

===========================================================

¶27

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 09-08-2016

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶29

The challenge in the present writ applications is to an order passed by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Patliputra Circle, Patna on 27^th of January, 2016 (in C.W.J.C. No. 4618 of 2016), on 19^th of February, 2016 (in C.W.J.C. No. 5301 of 2016) under Section 31(1) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

¶30

The petitioner has challenged the said orders on the ground that the goods sold by the petitioner are industrial inputs in terms of Entry- 79 of Schedule-III of the Act; therefore, goods sold shall attract Value Added Tax at the rate of 5% in terms of Entry- 189 of Part-III of the said Schedule.

¶31

The question as to whether the goods sold by the petitioner attract tax at the rate of 5% or 13.5% is a question of fact in view of the nature of transactions and goods sold. It is open to the petitioner to avail alternative statutory remedy in support of its contention in the manner it considers appropriate. Therefore, we

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.4618 of 2016 dt.09-08-2016

¶33

3/3

¶34

refrain ourselves from exercising the writ jurisdiction and dispose of the present writ applications with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy in accordance with law.

¶35

(Hemant Gupta, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P.K.P. N.A.F.R. U

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Sundar Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Upendra Kumar Singh Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Nitish Kumar and Ors. Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Janki Eit Udyog Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Janki Eit Udyog Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.