Paragon Marmo, A Partnership Firm vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 12282 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12335/2022

Paragon Marmo, A Partnership Firm, Having Its Registered Address At 94, New Fatehpura, Udaipur Through Its Partner Vikas Surana S/o Shri Bhatgwat Singh Surana, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Near Uit Circle, New Fatehpura, Udaipur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through Finance Secretary, Finance Department, New Delhi.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And Minerals, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Finance Secretary, State Finance Department (Tax Division), Jaipur (Raj.).

4. Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ward 1, Circle D, Udaipur (Raj.).

                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Paramveer Singh
For Respondent(s)           :     --



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                       Order

13/10/2022

The petitioner, through this writ petition, has laid challenge

to the impugned orders/ notice issued by the respondent

Department demanding GST on the royalty collected by the

petitioner.

In a bunch of writ petitions led by D.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.8109/2022 (Sudarshan Lal Gupta vs. Union of India & Ors.)

and connected matters, Division Bench of this Court at Jaipur

(2 of 2) [CW-12335/2022]

Bench of Rajasthan High Court, vide order dated 27.09.2022, has

repelled identical challenge laid to demand of GST on royalty.

However, inspite thereof, Shri Paramveer Singh vehemently and

fervently urged that the learned Division Bench in the case of

Sudarshan Lal Gupta (Supra), failed to make correct interpretation

of the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of State of Assam

vs. Barak Upatyaka D.U. Karmachari Sanstha (Civil Appeal

No.6492/2002) decided on 17.03.2009 and thus, the writ

petition merits acceptance.

Irrespective of the fact that similar previous judgments have

been challenged before Hon'ble the Supreme Court and even

though issue has not been finally decided by Hon'ble the Supreme

Court and is pending consideration before a Bench of nine Judges

in the case of Mineral Area Development Authority etc. &

Ors. vs. M/s. Steel Authority of India & Ors., reported in

(2011)4 SCC 450, as a Coordinate Bench of this Court has

repelled the self same challenge to leviability of GST on royalty,

we are not inclined to take a different view in the matter.

In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in this writ

petition which is dismissed as such.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J 48-Sudhir Asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)