Golekha Bihari Aich vs Chief Commissioner
2025 Latest Caselaw 7303 Ori

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 7303 Ori
Judgement Date : 21 April, 2025

Orissa High Court

Golekha Bihari Aich vs Chief Commissioner on 21 April, 2025

Author: Murahari Sri Raman

Bench: Murahari Sri Raman

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                        W.P.(C) No.10099 of 2025

                       Golekha Bihari Aich                      ....             Petitioner
                                                                   Represented by Adv.-
                                                             Mr. Sunil Mishra, Advocate
                                                         along with Mr. S. Das, Advocate
                                                   -Versus-

                       Chief Commissioner, CGST &               ....      Opposite Parties
                       Central Excise, Odisha and others
                                                                  Represented by Adv.-
                                                       Mr. Sujan Kumar Roy Choudhury,
                                 Senior Standing Counsel, GST, Central Excise & Customs

                                         CORAM:
                             THE HON' BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                           AND
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

                                                    ORDER

Order No. 21.04.2025 I.A. No.5834 of 2025 and W.P.(C) No.10099 of 2025

01. 1. Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner,

referring to Notification No.25/2012-Service Tax dated 20th June,

2012 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance,

Department of Revenue, submits that the adjudicating authority Signature Not Verified has appreciated the fact of works contract being executed for the Digitally Signed Signed by: Government Corporation i.e. Odisha Lift Irrigation Corporation MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA Designation:

Secretary Ltd., and dropped the proceeding. However, at the instance of the Reason:

Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Apr-2025 18:21:55

Principal Commissioner GST & Central Excise, Bhubaneswar

Commissionerate, the Additional Commissioner, GST & Central

Excise, has filed an appeal which came to be allowed by the

Commissioner (Appeals), Bhubaneswar by order dated 29 th

January, 2025 without appreciating the fact that the execution of

works contract was in respect of services provided to the

Government Corporation which falls within ambit of aforesaid

exemption notification. He submits that when the transaction itself

is exempted and involves question of law, the order of the

appellate authority allowing the appeal is, therefore, made subject

matter of challenge before this Court. In this regard, he has placed

reliance on a judgment of Supreme Court in case of

Commissioner, Customs Central Excise and Service Tax, Patna

v. M/s. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt. Ltd. reported in

2023 LiveLaw (SC) 885.

2. Mr. Sujan Kumar Roy Choudhury, learned Senior

Signature Standing Counsel, GST, Central Excise & Customs appearing on Not Verified behalf of opposite parties No.1 to 4 objected to entertainment of Digitally Signed Signed by:

MRUTYUNJAYA the present application on the ground that there is an alternative PANDA Designation:

Secretary Reason:

Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Apr-2025 18:21:55

remedy available for the petitioner to approach the appellate

tribunal.

3. Since the appellate authority has failed to apply the terms

of exemption notification dated 20th June, 2012 to determine the

service tax liability, and acted at the instruction of the Principal

Commissioner, the appellate order has been challenged in this writ

petition. Therefore, this Court is inclined to consider the issues:

i. whether the transaction in question falls within the fold of

exemption notification; and

ii. whether the Odisha Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd., is

comprehended within the meaning of 'governmental

authority' so that the service provided by execution of

works contract in respect of Government Corporation

would fall within the scope of exemption notification dated

20th June, 2012?

Signature 4. Issue notice. Mr. Choudhury has entered appearance on Not Verified behalf of opposite parties No.1 to 4 by filing appearance memo in Digitally Signed Signed by:

MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA Court today and seeks four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Designation:

Secretary Reason:

Authentication Since he has entered appearance on behalf of the opposite parties, Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Apr-2025 18:21:55

no formal notice need be issued to them. Let adequate number of

copies of the writ petition be served upon him within three

working days. The appearance memo is taken on record.

5. Let notice be issued to opposite party No.5 by

speed/registered post with A.D., making it returnable before the

next date, requisites for which shall be filed within three working

days. Accept one set of process fee. Office is directed to get postal

tracking report.

6. As an interim measure, the order dated 29th January, 2025

passed by Commissioner (Appeals), GST, CX & Customs,

Bhubaneswar may not be given effect to till the next date.