The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the review petition filed by the State. The court held that the earlier decision in Hindustan Zinc Ltd did not contravene the Division Bench ruling in Carpo Power Limited regarding the broad applicability of 'C' Forms for manufacturing and resale.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 21/2021
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Dutt For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pushkar Taimini for Mr. Sanjay Nahar
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
02/11/2022
This review petition is filed on behalf of the State seeking review of the order dated 18.11.2020 passed by this Court in SBCWP No. 6837/2018.
This Court allowed the writ petition filed by the petitioner while relying on decision rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of this
(2 of 3)
[WRW-21/2021]
Court in Hindustan Zinc Ltd Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors (SBCWP No. 5506/2018) decided on 18.05.2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-State has submitted that the controversy involved in Hindustan Zinc Ltd (supra) was in relation to procurement of High Speed Diesel for the purpose of mining only whereas, the respondents-firm is not involved in mining activities and, therefore, cannot claim ‘C’ Forms for purchasing of High Speed Diesel for manufacturing and re-sale of the ceramic items. It is also submitted that since in the Hindustan Zinc (supra), the controversy was regarding issuance of ‘C’ Forms for purchasing High Speed Diesel for mining activities, the case of the respondents was not covered by the decision of Hindustan Zinc (supra), hence the order passed by this Court is required to be reviewed.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has vehemently opposed the review petition and argued that in the Hindustan Zinc Ltd (supra), the learned Single Judge has clarified that the State cannot restrict the uses of ‘C’ Forms only for the purpose of re-sale of six items mentioned in the amended definition of the goods in Section 2 (d) of the CST Act and ‘C’ Forms is required to be issued in the cases of manufacturing and re-sale of the goods also. It is further submitted that decision of the Hindustan Zinc Ltd (supra) was based on the Division Bench decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in Carpo Power Limited Vs. State of Haryana and others (CWP No. 29437/2017) decided on 28.03.2018. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in the Carpo Power Limited (supra) the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the uses of ‘C’ Forms cannot be restricted for six items
(3 of 3)
[WRW-21/2021]
mentioned in the amended definitions of goods in Section 2 (d) of the CST Act and it would be applicable in case of procurement of goods for the purpose of manufacturing and re-sale.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the material available on record particularly, the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Hindustan Zinc Ltd (supra) and the decision of Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Carpo Power Ltd, I do not find any merit in this review petition, hence the same is dismissed.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
Surabhii/50-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition Seeker the review of the order allowing the writ regarding the issuance of 'C' Forms for manufacturing and resale of ceramic items, distinguishing it from mining activities
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hindustan Zinc Ltd Vs. The State of Rajasthan & OrsDistinguished¶22
Hindustan Zinc Ltd Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors (SBCWP No. 5506/2018)
Carpo Power Limited Vs. State of Haryana and othersFollowed¶23
Carpo Power Limited Vs. State of Haryana and others (CWP No. 29437/2017)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The State Of Rajasthan
M/s. Dileep Potteries Pvt. Ltd.
The Union Of India
Vijay Bishnoi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
