Ranjith Lal. S. Vs Assistant Commissioner (Kerala High Court)
Summary: The Kerala High Court considered a writ petition challenging Ext.P1 order-in-original and Ext.P2 summary of the order issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The petitioner primarily challenged the assessment on the ground that it had been made solely by relying upon Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules. The petitioner relied upon the decision of the Kerala High Court in M/S Snce Laboratories Private Limited v. Union of India & Others, dated 10.10.2024, in W.P.(C) No.17447/2023, wherein Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules was found to be ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act.
The Court observed that the impugned assessment had been finalised in the light of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules. Accordingly, the Court held that the law declared in the earlier decision was applicable to the present case. The writ petition was consequently disposed of by quashing Ext.P1 and Ext.P2.
Challenge to the Section 74 Order
The petitioner challenged Ext.P1 order-in-original and Ext.P2 summary of the order issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The principal ground of challenge was that the assessment had been made solely relying upon Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules.
Reliance on the Kerala High Court Decision on Rule 96(10)
The petitioner relied upon the Kerala High Court’s decision in M/S Snce Laboratories Private Limited v. Union of India & Others, dated 10.10.2024, in W.P.(C) No.17447/2023.
According to the supplied material, Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules was found in that decision to be ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act. The petitioner contended that this declaration applied to the assessment challenged in the present writ petition.
Court’s Observation and Finding
The Kerala High Court observed that the impugned assessment had been finalised in the light of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules. On that basis, the Court held that the law declared by it in the earlier decision was applicable to the present case.
The Court therefore disposed of the writ petition by quashing Ext.P1 and Ext.P2.
Final Decision
The writ petition was disposed of and Ext.P1 order-in-original and Ext.P2 summary of the order were quashed.
Cases Discussed
- M/S Snce Laboratories Private Limited v. Union of India & Others — Kerala High Court, W.P.(C) No.17447/2023, dated 10.10.2024
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Ext.P1 order-in-original and Ext.P2 summary of the order, issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The challenge raised by the petitioner against Ext.P1 and P2 is mainly on the ground that, the assessment was made solely relying upon 96 (10) of CGST Rules, which was found to be ultra vires of Section 16 of the IGST Act, by this Court in W.P.(C) No.17447/2023 (M/S Snce Laboratories Private Limited v. Union of India & Others) dated 10.10.2024.
2. It is discernible from the impugned judgment in this writ petition that, the assessment is finialised in the light of Rule 96 (10) of the CGST Rules and therefore the law declared by this Court is applicable to this case.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, quashing Ext.P1 and P2.
