Appellate Authority Has To Consider Grounds Raised In Appeal And Decide On Merits, Even If Appeal Is Heard Ex Parte: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court stated that the Appellate Authority has a duty and an obligation to examine grounds raised by assessee in memorandum of appeal and decide issue on merits even if appeal is filed ex parte. The Bench consisting of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy, stated that “the Appellate Authority even while considering the appeal ex parte will have to consider the grounds raised in the memorandum of appeal, deciding the appeal on merits……” The ...

Patna High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Notifications Extending Timeline For Issuance Of Orders U/S 73(10) Of CGST Act

The Patna High Court has rejected a petition challenging Notifications extending timeline for issuance of Orders under Section 73(10) of the GST Act.The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy was dealing with the case where the assessees/petitioners filed writ petition against Notification Nos. 13/2022-Central Tax, 9/2023-Central Tax & 56/2023-Central Tax which extended the dates for issuing orders under Section 73(10) of the GST Act.In this...

In Absence Of An Express Agreement Waiving Applicability Of S.12(5) Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, Arbitration Clause Becomes Otiose: Patna HC

The Patna High Court bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran has held that the arbitration clause became otiose by reason of the substitution of Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by Act 3 of 2016, which made the Engineer-in-Chief or the administrative head of the Public Works Division ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator and disentitled from appointing an arbitrator. The court observed that in the absence of any express agreement waiving the applicability of...

S.129(3) CGST Act- 7 Days Limitation Period For Passing Penalty Order After Notice To Goods Owner/ Transporter Mandatory: Patna HC

The Patna High Court has made it clear that the seven days limitation period prescribed under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act for passing an order of penalty, after notice has been issued to the goods owner/ transporter for violation of the CGST Act- is mandatory in nature. Stipulation in Section 129(3) CGST Act is that the proper officer detaining or seizing goods or conveyances shall issue a notice in 'FORM GST MOV-07' within seven days of such detention or...

Industrial Benefit Scheme Extended By State Government Can't Be Withdrawn By Electricity Department On Basis Of Audit Objection: Patna High Court

Referring to the decision of Shanta Mani Hand Made Paper Industries Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors [CWJC No. 2941 of 2010], the Patna High Court reiterated that supplementary bills which are punitive in nature, cannot be raised upon taxpayer and benefit granted by State government cannot be withdrawn based on mere audit objection.The High Court reiterated so after finding that the subsidy granted to the petitioner by the State government in the form of Industrial Incentive policy was withdrawn...

S.110 Customs Act- Failure To Disclose Reasons For Confiscating Goods 'Draconian', Violates Article 14, Renders Provisional Attachment Illegal: Patna HC

The Patna High Court has held that failure on part of the customs officer to record reasons for confiscating goods under Section 110 of Customs Act, renders the provisional attachment “illegal”.The provision empowers a customs officer to seize goods if he has 'reason to believe' that such goods are liable to confiscation under the Act, and prescribes subsequent procedure.Bench of Justices PB Bajanthri and Alok Kumar Pandey observed, “For seizure of goods, unless there are strong and compelling...

Liquidator Never Informed Of Reassessment Proceedings, Patna High Court Quashes Order

The Patna High Court has quashed the order as the liquidator was not informed of the reassessment proceedings.The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy has observed that the liquidator should be noticed and participate in the reassessment proceedings. The notices were all issued to the email of the assessee after the liquidator was appointed, which makes it clear that the liquidator was never informed of the reassessment proceedings. The appellant/assessee is under...

AO Not Empowered To Summarily Reject Section 197 Application: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has held that a demand pending against the assessee would not clothe the Assessing Officer with the power to summarily reject an application under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy has observed that Section 197 only clothes the Assessing Officer with the power to satisfy himself that the total income of the recipient justifies the deduction of Income Tax at any lower rates or at a NIL rate. The...

Reference Under NHAI Act Dismissed For Default, Party Should Challenge Award Under Section 34 , Not By Writ : Patna High Court

The Bench of Justice Rajiv Roy of Patna High Court has held that a writ petition is not maintainable to challenge an order of Arbitrator dismissing reference under NHAI Act for default. It held that the aggrieved party should challenge the award under Section 34 of the Act. Facts The respondent (NHAI) had acquired the land of the petitioner after classifying it as 'Developing Land' for the construction of Chhapra-Gopalganj Highway. Disagreeing with the amount of compensation...

Differentiation Between Government Employees And Other Employees For Leave Encashment Exemption Not Violative Of Article 14: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has held that differentiation between government employees and other employees for leave encashment exemption is neither discriminatory nor violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy has observed that the legislature must have the freedom to select and classify persons, properties, and income that it would tax and/or not tax. Thus, the differentiation made by the state between the employees of the...

Patna High Court Imposes Fine Of Rs. 5,000 On GST Officer For 'Forcible And Illegal Recovery' Amid Non-Functional GST Tribunal

In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on a Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) officer for forcible and illegal recovery of the full tax amount from a man waiting to avail the statutory remedy of appeal before GST tribunal which has not been made functional in Bihar. The court has directed the department to reimburse the entire collected tax within 2 weeks. The ruling was issued by a division bench led by Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy, granting...

Dispute Can't Be Referred To Arbitration In Absence Of An Arbitration Agreement Under Article 226 Of Constitution: Patna High Court

The High Court of Patna has held that no dispute can be referred to arbitration by a Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution when there is no agreement between the parties.The bench of Justice Partha Sarthy held that the remedy of arbitration is the creature of a contract and the same cannot be utilised in absence of a written agreement between the parties as provided under Section 7 of the A&C Act. FactsThe relevant background of the case involves the...