Allowed

Amit Kumar Jashwant Lal v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC29 Nov 2018CW/25040/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special civil writ petition challenging the issuance of C-forms under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the Bench allowed the petition and directed respondents to issue forms consistent with previous orders, entitling petitioners to refunds for excessive tax paid.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to issue C Forms under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and process claims for excess tax within twelve weeks.

Amit Kumar Jashwant Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 25040/2018

¶3

Amit Kumar Jashwant Lal, Situated At Khasra No. 689, Runji Pipliya, Th Pachphar, Bhawani Mandi, Jhalawar Raj Proprietor Shri Amit Kumar Son Of Shri Jashwant Lal Resident Of Bazaar No. 6, Ramgangmandi Distirct Kota Through Authorized Signatory Shri Umesh Chauhan Son Of Shri Ramswaroop Chauhan Resident Of Prakash Taklies, Balchand Pada, Bundi (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Finance, Secretariat, Jan Path, Jaipur

¶7

The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Kar Bhawan, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Circle Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶9

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Circle Jhalawar, Rajasthan.

¶10

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Circle Kota, Rajasthan.

¶11

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Circle Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

¶12

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Circle, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶13

The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Circle Bikaner, Rajasthan.

¶14

Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.

¶15

The Under Secretary (St-Ii), Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, State Tax Division, New Delhi. ----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudarshan Kumar Ladda, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nikhil Simlote, Adv.

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CW-25040/2018]

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶20

Order

¶21

29/11/2018

¶22

The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction against the respondents for issuing “C” Form under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short the “Act of 1956”) for the quarter July-September, 2017 and onwards.

¶23

Mr. Nikhil Simlote, counsel for the respondents has submitted that the similar controversy has been decided by this Court in SBCWP No.21574/2018 [M/s Salman Arif Arif Ahmad & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.] The order dt.21574/2018 passed by this Court dt.15.11.2018 is reproduced hereunder:-

¶24

“The order passed in the case of Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) is reproduced hereunder:

¶25

“Accordingly, the present writ petitions are allowed in the same terms as Corpo Power Limited (supra). It is held that the respondents are liable to issue “C” Forms in respect of the High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate procured for mining purposes through interstate trade. In the event of the petitioners having had to pay any amount on account of the respondents wrongful refusal to issue “C” Forms the petitioners shall be entitled to refund and, or adjustment of the same from the concerned authorities who collected the excess tax. The concerned Authorities shall process such a claim within twelve weeks of the same being made by the petitioners in writing and the petitioners furnishing the requisite documents/form.”

¶26

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition stands allowed and the directions given in the case of Hindustan Zink Limited Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) will be followed.”

¶27

The present writ petition is allowed in the terms of order passed by this Court in SBCWP No.21574/2018.

¶28

(3 of 3) [CW-25040/2018]

¶29

The parties has already directed to be governed by the direction which may be given in the case of [Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.] passed in SBCWP No.5506/2018 at Principal Seat, Jodhpur dt.18.05.2018.

¶30

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

¶31

A.Kumar/58

Amit Kumar Jashwant Lal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Jashwant Lal v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Shriram General Insurance Comp Vs Rekha Bai and Ors.

Shriram General Insurance Comp Vs Prem Bai and Ors.

Chetan Kumar Todawata Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Banay Singh S/O Shri Natthi Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhero Lal, Son of Shri Ghisya Vs Firm Jhumarlal Swarooplal Tiwari

Ramdev S/O Shri Jawara Vs State of Rajasthan