R.K. TRANSPORT & CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED v. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.
BACKGROUND
The petitioner had obtained commercial vehicle rental/hiring services and paid the invoices along with GST. The tax paid, however, did not appear in the recipient's GSTR-2A because the supplier had not filed GSTR-01. Consequently, the petitioner was unable to utilise the corresponding ITC.
Representations were made to the tax authorities requesting action against the supplier for collecting GST without depositing it with the Government. The authorities took the position that the supplier fell within the Central GST jurisdiction and therefore action could not be initiated by the State authorities.
COURT OBSERVATION
The Court held that the stand of the official respondents was contrary to Section 76(1) and (2) of the Jharkhand GST Act. The provision applies to “every person” who collects an amount representing GST and does not pay it to the Government, including a person who is not registered under the JGST Act.
The Court further held that the authorities could not refuse action merely because the supplier was registered under the Central GST authorities. The State authorities were under a duty to initiate proceedings under Section 76(2). The Court also rejected the plea of res judicata because the earlier writ petition had not resulted in adjudication on merits.
FINAL VERDICT
The writ petition was allowed with costs of ₹1,00,000/- payable by the supplier to the petitioner. The official respondents were directed to initiate proceedings under Section 76 of the Jharkhand GST Act against the supplier for collecting tax and not crediting it to the State Government.
Other Case Law
Suresh Kumar vs Commissioner CGST Delhi North
Validity of service of GST order and limitation for passing order; effect of delayed uploading of DRC-07 (Section Involved: Section 169, Section 107, Section 73, Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017)
Case Facts:The petitioner challenged two GST orders and corresponding DRC-07 for...
Read MoreCargotec India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Whether refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 on export of IT Software Services can be denied on the grounds of (i) services rendered from unregistered premises, and (ii) absence of nexus between input services a
BACKGROUND The appellant, a 100% Export Oriented Unit operating under the S...
Read MoreGenpact India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Others
Whether BPO services provided by an Indian company (Genpact India) to its overseas group entity (Genpact International Inc., USA) under a Master Services Sub-Contracting Agreement constitute
Background & Relevant FactsThe petitioner, Genpact India Pvt. Ltd., is a BPO...
Read More