Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2097 (RAJ)

Shiv Shankar Mining Private Limited v. Union Of India

2018-10-12

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2018
JUDGMENT Sandeep Mehta, J. - Learned counsel for the parties state that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the ratio of the order dated 18.05.2018 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this court in the bunch of writ petitions led by Hindustan Zinc Limited vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. [S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5506/2018], wherein this court ordered as below :- "In the present case too, the Parliament has retained high speed diesel along with petroleum crude, motor spirit, natural gas, aviation turbine fuel and alcoholic liquor for human consumption crude which have been specifically mentioned in Section 9 of the GST Act while defining the 'goods'. Besides, the registration under Section 7 (2) of the Act is still valid and has not been cancelled and can be cancelled only within the parameters of Section 4 of the CST Act. Hence, this Court finds that it is obligatory duty of the respondents to issue 'C' form to the petitioner - company and any failure on the part of the respondents to do so is without any authority of law. Thus, this Court finds nothing to distinguish the case of the petitioners herein from that of the petitioner in the case of Carpo Power Limited (supra). Accordingly, the present writ petitions are allowed in the same terms as Corpo Power Limited (supra). It is held that the respondents are liable to issue 'C' Forms in respect of the High Speed Diesel procured for mining purposes through interstate trade. In the event of the petitioners having had to pay any amount on account of the respondents wrongful refusal to issue 'C' Forms the petitioners shall be entitled to refund and/or adjustment of the same from the concerned authorities who collected the excess tax. The concerned authorities shall process such a claim within twelve weeks of the same being made by the petitioners in writing and the petitioners furnishing the requisite documents/form." 2. As the controversy involved in the case at hand is ad idem, the instant writ petition is also allowed in the same terms. The stay application is also disposed of. 3. No order as to costs.