Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Adv. Pooja Patil Vs Deputy Commissioner (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition No.1085 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 24/01/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Adv. Pooja Patil Vs Deputy Commissioner (Bombay High Court)

Legal Services Provided By Individual Advocate Or A Partnership Firm Of Advocates Are Exempted From Levy Of Service Tax: Bombay HC

In a very significant and most worthwhile notable judgment that is most directly concerned with none other than the advocates themselves, the Bombay High Court which is one of the oldest and so also most prestigious High Courts in India has in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest oral judgment titled Adv. Pooja Patil vs The Deputy Commissioner, CGST and CX Division VI, Raigad Commissionerate & Ors in Writ Petition No. 1085 of 2024 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2024:BHC-AS:5388-DB in the exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction has minced just no words absolutely to hold so very commendably that the legal services provided by an individual Advocate or a partnership firm of Advocates are exempted from levy of service tax. We thus see that the Bombay High Court held so in a writ petition that had been filed by a woman advocate against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, CGST (Central Goods and Services Tax) and Central Excise, Raigad by which an amount of Rs. 35,82,298 towards service tax under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of CGST Act, 2017 was ordered to be recovered from the petitioner Advocate with interest and penalty. In the fitness of things, we find that the Bombay High Court very rightly ruled that no useful purpose would be achieved in present proceeding remanding to the Designated Officer as the same acted without jurisdiction. Accordingly, we see that the turn of events as anticipated, the Bombay High Court allowed the petition and so very rightly quashed the impugned order. Very rightly so!

At the very outset, this remarkable, robust, rational and recent judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice GS Kulkarni for a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of himself and Hon’ble Mr Justice Kishore C Sant sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails an Order-in-Original dated 26th October, 2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, CGST and C. Excise, Raigad, whereby an amount of Rs.35,82,298/- towards service tax under the provisions of Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, has been ordered to be recovered from the Petitioner interalia with interest and penalty. The operative part of the impugned order reads thus:-

“ORDER

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031