9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 474 - HC - GSTGST liability on seigniorage fee and mining lease amounts paid by the respective petitioner to the Government - HELD THAT - The Division Bench Judgment in a batch of cases where the lead case is TVL. A. VENKATACHALAM VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) 2024 (2) TMI 488 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has held that 'It is made clear that there shall be no recovery of GST on royalty until the Nine Judge Constitution Bench takes a decision.' This petition is liable to be disposed of on the same terms insofar as it relates to either the issue of seigniorage fee or mining lease - the petitioner is permitted to submit his reply to the intimation within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition disposed off.
Issues involved: Assailing GST liability on seigniorage fee and mining lease amounts paid to the Government.
GST liability on mining lease: The petitioner challenged the intimation of GST liability on seigniorage fee and mining lease amounts paid to the Government. The petitioner relied on Notification No.13/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) which excludes GST on services supplied by the Central, State Government, or local authority for renting immovable property to a business entity. Reference was made to interim orders by the Supreme Court granting a stay on royalty and mining lease issues, pending a decision by a nine-judge Constitution Bench. The Division Bench judgment in A. Venkatachalam v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Palladam, was also cited by the petitioner. Directions by the Division Bench: The Division Bench issued directions for cases challenging show cause notices related to GST on royalty. Writ petitioners were given four weeks to submit objections or representations. Adjudication was to proceed after hearing the petitioners, with orders kept in abeyance until the Constitution Bench decides on royalty. No GST recovery on royalty was allowed until the Constitution Bench's decision. Writ petitioners were granted the right to address grievances in appropriate forums after the Constitution Bench's decision. Disposition of the petition: The judgment deemed the petition to be disposed of on the same terms regarding the seigniorage fee or mining lease issue. The petitioner was allowed to submit a reply to the intimation within four weeks. W.P.No.5224 of 2024 was disposed of with no costs, leading to the closure of W.M.P.Nos.5740 and 5741 of 2024.
|
