9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (1) TMI 848 - HC - GSTValidity of restriction imposed under amended Rule 89(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 vide para 2(i) of the Notification No.21/2018-Central Tax dated 18.4.2018 - ultra vires to the Section 54(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 or not - refund claim of the credit availed on input services - HELD THAT - Since vires of Rule 89(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 has been challenged, let the notices be issued to the Attorney General of India and the Advocate General of the State. Let the case be listed in the week commencing 8.3.2021 in the additional cause list. When the case is next listed the name of Shri Sanjay Kumar Om be shown as counsel for the respondent no.1.
Issues:
Challenge to the vires of Rule 89(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. Analysis: The petitioner filed a petition seeking various reliefs, including challenging the restriction imposed under amended Rule 89(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The petitioner argued that these restrictions were ultra vires to Section 54(3) of the respective Acts. Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the restrictions were unreasonable, arbitrary, and violated Article 14 & 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also sought the setting aside of a Refund Order that rejected the refund claim of the credit availed on input services and requested the respondents to sanction the balance refund amount. The court noted the challenge to the vires of Rule 89(5) of the mentioned GST Rules and directed notices to be issued to the Attorney General of India and the Advocate General of the State. The respondents were directed to file their counter affidavits within four weeks, and the petitioner was given one week thereafter to file a rejoinder affidavit. The case was scheduled to be listed in the week commencing 8.3.2021 in the additional cause list, with a specific direction regarding the representation of counsel for the respondent no.1 in the next listing. In summary, the judgment involves a comprehensive analysis of the challenges raised against the restrictions imposed under Rule 89(5) of the GST Rules, the legal arguments presented by the petitioner, and the procedural directions issued by the court for further proceedings in the case.
|
