9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1267 - HC - GSTLearned Single Judge had omitted to consider and adjudicate upon other grounds raised in the writ petition - Constitutional validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - time limitation - HELD THAT - Issue decided in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS 2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT where it was held that The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 Remittance of the writ petition for fresh consideration and disposal on the grounds raised other than the validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act, would serve the ends of justice - The writ petition is restored on the files of this Court.
Issues:
1. Challenge to assessment order for the year 2014-15. 2. Constitutional validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act (KSGST Act). 3. Omission to consider and adjudicate upon other grounds raised in the writ petition. Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to a writ petition challenging the dismissal of the petition against an assessment order for the year 2014-15. The petitioner contested that the tax imposed on the sale of medicine during treatment at their hospital was unsustainable based on legal grounds. The constitutional validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act was also questioned in the petition. 2. The writ petition was dismissed along with other cases citing a previous judgment in WP(C) No. 11335/2018, which had addressed the validity of Section 174. However, it was argued that the previous judgment did not consider other grounds raised in the present petition. The government pleader for the respondents acknowledged that the previous judgment only covered the validity of Section 174, and several appeals against it were pending. 3. In light of the limited scope of the previous judgment, the Court found it necessary to remit the writ petition for fresh consideration. The Court allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the earlier judgment and restoring the writ petition for reconsideration. The case was directed to be placed before the Single Judge for a fresh decision on all grounds raised, excluding the validity of Section 174. Any interim stay in place was ordered to be revived until further proceedings.
|
