Who Qualifies As 'Proper Officer' To Issue Show Cause Notices U/S 74 Of CGST Act? Jharkhand High Court Clarifies

The Jharkhand High Court has provided a significant clarification regarding who qualifies as the “proper officer” empowered to issue a show cause notice under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. The Division Bench of Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Arun Kumar Rai observed that “If the definition of the Poper Officer will be taken into consideration along with the provision of Section 168 of the Act, 2017, the Commissioner if authorized to act by the...

Jharkhand High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings For Delayed Tax Payment In Absence Of Any Penalty Proceedings

The Jharkhand High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against a man accused of tax evasion under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case involved allegations that the petitioner, a tractor dealer, failed to pay the tax liability associated with his income tax returns for the assessment year 2011-12, despite declaring the amount in his filing.The court's decision to quash the proceedings hinged on the fact that the tax was eventually paid, albeit with some delay, and that there were no pending...

Jharkhand High Court Dismisses Dept's Appeals For Not Filing Delay Condonation Application Along With Appeal Memo

The Jharkhand High Court, while dismissing the appeal filed by the department, held that a delayed condonation application not filed with an appeal memo and subsequent filing cannot cure defects.The bench of Chief Justice B.R. Sarangi and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad has observed that time and again if the appeal memo does not contain an application of delay condonation and was not filed at the time of filing of the same, then even subsequent filing of the application for condonation of delay...

Section 11 Of Arbitration Act Mandates Examination Of Written, Signed Arbitration Clauses As Per Section 7 Requirements: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar has held that in Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court is required to see whether there is an arbitration clause which as per section 7 should be a document in writing signed by the parties. The bench held where the existence of the arbitration agreement is undisputed by the parties involved, the dispute should accordingly be referred to arbitration. Brief Facts: Tata...

Section 11 Petition Requires Only Existence of Arbitration Clause, 'No More, No Less': Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar has held that the court in Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not required to look beyond except existence of the arbitration clause at this stage; 'no more no less'. Section 11 of the Arbitration Act pertains to the appointment of arbitrators. It outlines the procedure for the appointment of arbitrators in cases where parties to an arbitration agreement are unable to agree on the...

Jharkhand High Court Dismisses JUVNL's Appeal, Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment In Dispute With M/s Rites

The Jharkhand High Court has dismissed the appeal filed by Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited (JUVNL) challenging the writ court's order to appoint a sole arbitrator in its dispute with M/s Rites.The Court emphasized that it is the High Court's duty to reject petitions or defenses based on purely technical grounds aimed at gaining an unfair advantage.The Division Bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Navneet Kumar, noted, “…except for a broad proposition that...

Existence Of Arbitration Clause Doesn't Automatically Bar Criminal Proceedings: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi held that held that the existence of an arbitration clause does not automatically bar criminal proceedings. It held that quashing of cognizance or proceedings, as well as the initiation of arbitral proceedings related to commercial transactions, are not determinative factors. The bench held that merely because there is a remedy available for breach of contract through arbitration does not automatically lead the court to...

Refusal By JBVNL To Reimburse Contractor GST Impact On Indirect Transactions Violative Of Article 14: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that the action of Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam (JBVNL) offends Article 14 of the Constitution of India by refusing to reimburse contractor GST impact on indirect transactions.“This is a settled law that the state and its instrumentalities are required to demonstrate fair play in action. In “ABL International Ltd. and Another,"17 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that even in contractual matters, the state and its instrumentalities are required to follow the...

Unjust Retention Of Money Or Property Of Another Is Against Fundamental Principles And Patently Illegal: Jharkhand HC Imposes Rs 5 Lakh Penalty On JBVNL, Directs Board To Refund TDS

The Jharkhand High Court has held that any unjust withholding of money or property from another party goes against the fundamental principles of justice, fairness, and good conscience. In this context, the unauthorized deductions made from the ongoing bills are unquestionably unlawful.Furthermore, the Court has imposed a substantial penalty of Rs 5 Lacs on the Managing Director of Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (JBVNL) for engaging in unnecessary litigation and presenting frivolous...

Placement Agency To Be Given Proper SCN On Alleged Failure To Perform Duties Coupled With Monetary Loss To JSBCL: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that Rule 15 of the Jharkhand Excise (Operation of Retail Product Shops through Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited) Rules, 2022, and the corresponding clauses of the contract have to be restricted only to those situations where the placement agency has been found, albeit after hearing the agency, to have failed to provide manpower to Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Ltd. (JSBCL), which has resulted in pecuniary loss to the corporation. The bench...

Decision On A Question Of Law That Is Later Overturned Or Modified By The Superior Court In Another Case Does Not Form A Ground For Review: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has recently clarified the criteria for reviewing judgments in tax appeal cases, particularly regarding decisions based on legal questions. According to the explanation to Rule 1 of Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court stated that if a decision on a legal question forming the basis of a court judgment is later reversed or modified by a higher court in a different case, it cannot be used as grounds for reviewing the original judgment. The case centered...

Jharkhand High Court Allows Application for Revocation of Cancelled GST Registration Despite Expiry of Limitation Period

In a recent ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has permitted the filing of an application for revocation of cancelled GST registration, despite the expiration of the limitation period. The decision stemmed from a petition filed by a proprietor aggrieved by the dismissal of their petition under section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act). The petitioner sought to avail themselves of the option under section 30 of the GST Act for revocation of the cancellation of...