Gauhati High Court
N K Power And Infrastructure ... vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors on 19 July, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010068842021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2757/2021
N K POWER AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING
ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PLAZA BUILDING, GANHESHGURI, DISPUR
GUWAHATI , REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI NIPON
KUMAR TALUKDAR, S/O SRI SUMPURNA NANDA TALUKDAR, AGED
ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 209, NARAKASUR,
KAHILIPARA, NEAR BHARAT PETROL PUMP, GUWAHATI ASSAM
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA. MINISTRY
OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI
2:THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
GOVT. OF INDIA
NEW DELHI
3:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GST
GST BHAWAN
GUWAHATI
4:THE DESIGNATED COMMITTEE
CONSTITUTED UNDER RULE 5 OF THE SABKA VIKAS (LEGACY DISPUTE
RESOLUTION) RULES
2019
Page No.# 2/3
HEADED BY THE PRINICPAL COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GST
GUWAHAT
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K GUPTA
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
ORDER
Date : 19-07-2021
Heard Mr. R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard
Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned standing counsel for the authorities under the GST
being the respondent No.2, 3 and 4 and Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel
CGC for the respondent No.1.
2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of work contract services bearing
GST registration No. AACCN9548FSD001. The petitioner was issued a show
cause notice bearing No. F.No.DGCEI/GRN/INV/ST/02/2016/6035 dated
28.12.2018 raising the allegation that they have taken wrong benefit of CENVAT
amounting to Rs.1,57,51,593/- in contravention of the provision of Rule 2A of
the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 as well as CENVAT Credit
Rules 2004, the petitioner takes the stand that they are entitled to the benefit
under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
3. Accordingly, the petitioner made an application for relief under the said
scheme. But the claim of the petitioner made in the application stood rejected
by the order dated 12.02.2020 on the ground that an incorrect declaration had
been provided in the application form. According to the petitioners they had
inadvertently failed to mention certain penalty amounts they were imposed
upon them earlier and instead have mentioned the penalty imposed to be Rs.0.
Page No.# 3/3
4. The implication of rejecting the application under the scheme for having
mentioned the penalty to be Rs.0 was given a consideration by this Court in the
judgment dated 04.05.2020 in WP(C) 2149/2020, wherein, a conclusion was
arrived that in the event an inadvertent mistake either due to oversight or
because of callous attitude need not be penalized for the purpose. The said
conclusion was arrived at on the premises that no undue benefit would have
been accrued to the assesse for having not mentioned the penalty that was
earlier imposed to them.
5. In the circumstance, as agreed upon, by following the proposition laid
down in the judgment dated 04.05.2020 in WP(C) 2149 of 2020, we require the
petitioner assesse to file an application before the respondent No.3 being the
Principal Commissioner, GST Guwahati and upon such application being filed,
the Principal Commissioner to pass a reasoned order by taking note of all the
proposition laid down in the judgment dated 04.05.2020 in WP(C) 2149/2020.
Along with the application, the petitioner to also provide the Principal
Commissioner with a copy of the said judgment.
6. The requirement of passing the reasoned order be completed within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of the application of the
petitioner.
7. Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
