M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The ... on 3 February, 2022
Jharkhand High Court
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(T) No. 4510 of 2021
M/s Kuldip Kumar & Co. — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- Assistant Commissioner, CGST & C. Ex., South Division, Dhanbad
- Superintendent (Prev.) Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise,
Baliapur, Dhanbad — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4518 of 2021
Jaydhan Rajwar — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- Assistant Commissioner, CGST & C. Ex., South Division, Dhanbad
- Superintendent (Prev.) Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise,
Baliapur Range, Dhanbad — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4520 of 2021
Jagdip Agarwala — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- Assistant Commissioner, CGST & C. Ex., South Division, Dhanbad
- Superintendent (Prev.) Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise,
Baliapur Range, Dhanbad — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4545 of 2021
M/s Sri Sai Ram Minerals — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- Assistant Commissioner, CGST & C. Ex., South Division, Dhanbad
- Superintendent (Prev.) Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise,
Baliapur Range, Dhanbad — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4608 of 2021
M/s Maa Amba Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through the Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
3. The Superintendent (Preventive) Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 1
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4632 of 2021
M/s Bajrangbali Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through Additional Commissioner, Central GST & Central
2
Excise, Sub Commissionerate, Dhanbad
- The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Sub Commissionerate, Dhanbad
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Sub Commissionerate, Dhanbad
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4652 of 2021
M/s Bihar Bentonite Supply Co. — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through the Additional Commissioner, Central GST &
Central Excise, Dhanbad
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Dhanbad
3. The Assistant Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Dhanbad — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4677 of 2021
M/s Patnibona Stone Quarries — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
3. The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4683 of 2021
M/s Hindusthan Industries & Mining Corporation — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive) Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4685 of 2021
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 2
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
M/s Ganga Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4709 of 2021
3
M/s Paharia Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through the Additional Commissioner, Central GST &
Central Excise, Dhanbad
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Dhanbad
- The Superintendent (Preventive) Central GST & Central Excise, Dhanbad
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4711 of 2021
M/s Paharia Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through the Additional Commissioner, Central GST &
Central Excise, Dhanbad
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Dhanbad
- The Assistant Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Dhanbad
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Dhanbad
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4900 of 2021
M/s Hindusthan Industries & Mining Corporation — — Petitioner
Versus
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
- The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax ( Incharge), Sahibganj Circle,
Sahibganj
3. Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4903 of 2021
M/s Vansla Granite — — Petitioner
Versus
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
- Union of India through the Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise,
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 3
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
Sahibganj Range, Sahibganj
3. The Deputy Commissioner, State Goods and Service Tax & Commercial
Tax, Sahibganj ——— Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4904 of 2021
M/s Swastik Mineral Agency — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4905 of 2021
4
M/s Patnibona Stone Quarries — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise,
Ranchi
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4918 of 2021
M/s Vansla Granite — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through Assistant Commissioner, Central GST & Central
Excise, Division -Deoghar
2. The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Sahibganj Range,
Sahibganj — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4919 of 2021
M/s Swastik Mineral Agency — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Additional Commissioner (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Superintendent (Preventive), Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4959 of 2021
M/s Vidyarthi Stone Works — — Petitioner
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 4
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
Versus
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
- The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Sahibganj Circle, Sahibganj
- The State Tax Officer, Sahibganj Circle, Sahibganj
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 4971 of 2021
M/s Vidyarthi Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi
- The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Sahibganj Circle, Sahibganj
- The State Tax Officer, Sahibganj Circle, Sahibganj
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 36 of 2022
M/s Ansari Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central
5
Excise, Ranchi
- The Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Division-Deoghar
- The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Range- Sahibganj
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 42 of 2022
M/s Bhai Bhai Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Assistant Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Division- Deoghar
- The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Range-Sahibganj
— — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 114 of 2022
M/s Ansari Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Range-Sahibganj
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi 4. The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (In charge), Sahibganj Circle,
Sahibganj — — Respondents
With
W.P.(T) No. 115 of 2022
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 5
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
M/s Bhai Bhai Stone Works — — Petitioner
Versus
- Union of India through the Principal Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Ranchi
- The Superintendent, Central GST & Central Excise, Range- Sahibganj
- The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Dept. of State Tax, Ranchi 4. The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (In charge), Sahibganj Circle,
Sahibganj — — Respondents
…….
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN Through Video Conferencing For the Petitioners : M/s N.K. Pasari, Sidhi Jalan, Advocates : M/s Sumeet Gadodia, Ranjit Kushwaha, Advocates For the CGST : M/s Amit Kumar, Ashish Kumar Shekhar, Advocates : M/s P.A.S. Pati, Ranjana Mukherjee, Advocates For the State : Mr. Rahul Saboo, S.C.-I : Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, G.A.-I W.P.(T) No. 4510 of 2021 04/03.02.2022 Surviving defect is ignored on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner since page no. 66 is a map, part of the lease deed (Annexure-1).
W.P.(T) No. 4518 of 2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that typed copy of page no. 70 has already been submitted. As such, there are no surviving defect.
Accordingly, surviving defects have been cured. Office to verify.
W.P.(T) No. 4510 of 2021 & other analogous cases All these writ petitions raise common issues relating to levy of Service Tax and / or GST on royalty and District Mineral Fund Contribution paid by the petitioners, who are lessee in respect of the minor mineral executed by the State of Jharkhand. As such, they are tagged together.
For convenience sake the relevant details of individual petitioners with the period of service tax and / or GST involved and the dates on which impugned notices have been issued upon individual writ petitioners, are indicated in the form of a tabular chart herein below:
S.No. Case No. Party Name District Notice No:; Perio
W.P.(T)
No.
Notice date:
Issued by
1. 4510/2021 M/s Kuldip Kumar & Co. Dhanbad 774; 01.04.2
29.09.2021; to
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
2. 4518/2021 Jaydhan Rajwar Dhanbad 939; 01.04.2
11.10.2021; to
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
3. 4520/2021 Jagdip Agarwala Dhanbad 936; 01.04.2
11.10.2021; To
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
4. 4545/2021 M/s Sri Sai Ram Minerals Dhanbad 951; 01.04.2
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 6
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
11.10.2021; To
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
5. 4608/2021 M/s Maa Amba Stone Works Sahibganj 6313; 01.04.2
06.10.2021 to
Respondent no. 2 30.06.2
6. 4632/2021 M/s Bajrangbali Stone Sahibganj 1818; April,2
Works 12.10.2021 to
Respondent no. 2 March,2
7. 4652/2021 M/s Bihar Bentonite Supply Sahibganj 1788; April,
Co. 21.10.2021; to Ju
Respondent no.3 201
8. 4677/2021 M/s Patnibona Stone Sahibganj 4202; 01.04.2
Quarries 14/15.07.2021; to
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
9. 4683/2021 M/s Hindusthan Industries Sahibganj 4160; 01.04.2
and M ining Corporation 15.07.2021; to
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
10. 4685/2021 M/s Ganga Stone Works Sahibganj 6278; April,
23.09.2020 to Ju
Respondent no. 2 201
11. 4709/2021 M/s Paharia Stone Works Sahibganj 1836; April,
12.10.2021; to Mar
Respondent no.2 202
12. 4711/2021 M/s Paharia Stone Works Sahibganj —–; 01.04.2
27.09.2021; to
Respondent no. 3 30.06.20
13. 4900/2021 M/s Hindusthan Industries Sahibganj 05; 2018-19(
and Mining Corporation 29.10.2021 Quarter)
Respondent no.2 date
14. 4903/2021 M/s Vansla Granite Sahibganj 62; April, 2
04.02.2021 to Jun
Respondent no. 2 2017
15. 4904/2021 M/s Swastik Mineral Sahibganj 7233; April,20
Agency 09.10.2020 to Jun
Respondent no.3 2017
16. 4905/2021 M/s Patnibona Stone Sahibganj 7230; April, 2
Quarries 09.10.2020 to Jun
Respondent no.3, 2017
And 7613;
27/28.10.2020
Respondent no.3
17. 4918/2021 M/s Vansla Granite Sahibganj 1038; 01.04.20
22.09.2021; to
Respondent no.1 30.06.20
18. 4919/2021 M/s Swastik Mineral Sahibganj 4513; 01.04.20
Agency 27.07.2021; to
Respondent no.2 30.04.20
19. 4959/2021 M/s Vidyarthi Stone Works Sahibganj 5916; 2016-17
18.02.2021 06.03.20
Respondent no. 3
20. 4971/2021 M/s Vidyarthi Stone Works Sahibganj 5916; Financ
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 7
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
18.02.2021; Year (20
Respondent no.3 17) til
21. 36/2022 M/s Ansari Stone Works Sahibganj 932; 01.04.2
22.09.2021; to
Respondent no.2 30.06.2
22. 42/2022 M/s Bhai Bhai Stone Works Sahibganj 1023; 01.04.2
22.09.2021; to
Respondent no. 2 30.06.2
23. 114/2022 M/s Ansari Stone Works Sahibganj 183; July, 20
23.11.2020 March, 2
Respondent no. 2 And
And 2018-19
Reference no. 104 Quarte
02.11.2021
Respondent no. 4
24. 115/2022 M/s Bhai Bhai Stone Works Sahibganj 53; July, 20
04.02.2021 March, 2
Respondent no.2 And
And 2018-19
Reference no. 166 Quarter)
30.11.2021 2020-2
Respondent no. 4
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that this Court in a batch of writ petitions led by W.P.(T) No. 3878 of 2020 has been pleased to pass an interim order on 02.03.2021 staying the recovery of service tax for grant of mining lease / royalty from the petitioners, though interim protection so far as levy of CGST and / or JGST is concerned, was not granted. However, later on this Court has also been pleased to stay the payment of GST for grant of mining lease / royalty by the petitioners in view of the interim order passed by the Apex Court in the case of M/s Lakhwinder Singh Vrs. Union of India & others in Writ petition (Civil) No. 1076 of 2021 dated 04.10.2021 involving same issues in the batch of writ petitions led by W.P.(T) No. 4609 of 2021 in the case of M/s Ratan Black Stone, Sahibganj Vrs. Union of India through Principal Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise & others and other analogous cases vide order dated 06.01.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that since the issue involved in the present writ petitions are same, similar interim orders staying the recovery of service tax and / or GST may be passed in favour of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the respondent Union of India, CGST and the State seek and are allowed 4 weeks’ time to file counter affidavit in the respective writ petitions. 1 week time thereafter is allowed to the petitioners to file reply, if so advised.
Let the instant batch of writ petitions be also tagged along with W.P.(T) No. 3878 of 2020 and other analogous cases.
This Court finds that by the interim order dated 02.03.2021 passed in W.P.(T) No. 3878 of 2020 and other analogous cases the recovery of service tax for grant of mining lease / royalty from the petitioners therein has been stayed after considerations of the pleadings on record and rival
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 8
M/S Kuldip Kumar & Co vs Union Of India Through The … on 3 February, 2022
submissions of the parties in the following terms:
14. Other High Courts have passed more or less similar interim orders relating to
payment of service tax on royalty as noticed hereinabove. The High Court of Bombay
at Goa vide interim order dated 22.08.2017, has stayed the imposition of service tax
on royalty, but at the same time clarified that it would not come in the way of the revenue for conducting and completing its assessment and enquiry.
15. Having regard to the legal issues raised in respect of the levy of service tax on
royalty in the respective writ petitions, we are inclined to pass similar interim order
in respect thereof. While the revenue is not restrained from conducting and
completing the assessment proceedings, until further orders recovery of service tax
for grant of mining lease/royalty from the petitioners shall remain stayed. However,
we are not satisfied at this stage that any case for granting interim protection is made
out so far as the levy of CGST and/or JGST is concerned.
It further appears that pursuant to the interim order passed by the Apex Court dated 04.10.2021 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1076 of 2021 in the case of M/s Lakhwinder Singh (supra), wherein the Apex Court had stayed the payment of GST for grant of mining lease / royalty by the petitioners till further order, this Court has also passed an interim order in batch of writ petitions led by W.P.(T) No. 4609 of 2021 staying the payment of GST for grant of mining lease / royalty by the petitioners till further orders. Since the case of the present writ petitioners involves similar issues, they shall also be governed by the interim order passed earlier in the respective cases. While the Revenue is not restrained from conducting and completing the assessment proceedings, recovery of service tax and/or GST for grant of mining lease / royalty from the petitioners shall remain stayed until further orders.
List these cases after 5 weeks.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) A.Mohanty
Indian Kanoon – http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51953374/ 9
