Allowed

Gram Vikas Nav Yuvak Mandal v. Union of India and Anr.

Rajasthan HC15 Nov 2018CW/11799/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Goverdhana Bardhar held that no service tax was liable to be deducted from the petitioner NGO. Directing the State to refund the deducted amount within two months, the writ petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no.2 to refund the deducted service tax amount to the petitioner within two months of receiving a copy of the order.

Gram Vikas Nav Yuvak Mandal Vs Union of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11799/2017

¶3

Gram Vikas Nav Yuvak Mandal Laporiya Through Its Authorised Signatory Shri Jagveer Singh S/o Shri R, R/o Village Laporiya, Th. Dudu, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Union Of India, Through Chief Commissioner Of Central Excise, Service Tax And Customs Department, Ncrb Statue Circle, Jaipur

¶7

State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Secretariat, Janpath, Jaipur

¶8

Dr. Anurag Shrivastav Executive Engineer Enginner Incharge, Phed Dudu, Tonk Uniyara, Bisalpur Project Special Division Malpura Road Dudu, Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Archana on behalf of Ms. Mahi Yadav For Respondent(s) : Shri Anurag Kalawatiya

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

¶12

Judgment

¶13

15/11/2018

¶14

This writ petition has been filed by petitioner-Gram Vikas Nav Yuvak Mandal Laporiya, which is admittedly an NGO with the grievance that the respondent nos.2 and 3 have unduly deducted certain amount out of the sum payable to the petitioner for community participation activities carried out by it at the instance of Public Health and Engineering Department.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent-UOI has submitted that the Central Excise Department never required the respondent

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CW-11799/2017]

¶18

nos.2 and 3 to deduct the service tax. According to him, no service tax is payable by the petitioner for the kind of service that they were providing to respondent nos.2 and 3. The petitioner NGO was not required to be registered for service tax with the Excise Department.

¶19

Respondent nos.2 and 3 in their reply have submitted that service tax was deducted by the department as per the provisions of contract for depositing the tax with the concerned department, but the petitioner failed to provide the service tax registration number for being deposited in the Central Excise Department. Petitioner, which is an NGO, can claim refund from the concerned department as per the Rules of Central Excise Department.

¶20

Having regard to the categorical stand taken by the Central Excise Department that neither the petitioner was required to be registered, nor was required to pay any service tax, no service tax was liable to be deducted on its behalf. We therefore direct respondent no.2 to refund the deducted amount of service tax to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date copy of this order is produced before it.

¶21

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶22

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J

¶23

RS/77

Gram Vikas Nav Yuvak Mandal v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gram Vikas Nav Yuvak Mandal v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Karan Vs Deepak Upreti and Ors.

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs Ms Shakun Advertisingh Pvt. Ltd.

Umashankar Gurjar S/O Shri Mannalal Vs the Union of India

Narayan Lal Raiger S/O Dhannaram Raiger Vs District Collector

Shrimati W/O Prakash Vs Hemlata W/O Vijayveer Singh

Sant Ladhunath Nayak Sewa Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.