Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of "M/s Neogy & Sons Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Another" in Writ Petition No.10081/2005 dated 18.08.2006 contending that the nature of levy under MPGASTVA is in the nature of "tax" and not the "fee" and therefore, service tax cannot be made leviable on an amount which itself is in the nature of "tax". Further, it was also contended that the Writ Court has considered in detail the arguments put forth on behalf of the petitioner challenging the constitutional validity of the aforesaid Adhiniyam and arguments made by the State defending the same. The Writ Court, while considering the question of vires, dealt with the powers enshrined in the Constitution to the State Legislature to levy "tax" and under "Entries" given in legislative lists.

7. The Competent Authority of GST vide its Order-in-Original No.27-30/COMMR/ST/JBP/2022-23 dated 29.12.2022 has rejected all NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:35712 8 WP-4514-2023 the contentions made by the petitioner. In Para 30(i) of the said Order- in-Original, the Competent Authority observed that since the nature of the levy was not challenged before this Court in M/s Neogy & Sons (supra), the Hon'ble Court did not discuss the nature of the levy under MPGASTVA, 2005. The above observations are incorrect, false and misleading as the Writ Court has clearly examined that the nature of the levy is a "tax on land" under List II, Entry No.49 of the VII Schedule read with Article 246 of the Constitution of India. Further, observation made in Para 30(vii), is as follows "................Therefore I, with due respect to the Hon'ble High Court, find that the true nature of the levy under MPGASTVA Act needs to be examined in the light of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the subject since the true nature of the said levy has not been examined by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of M/s Neogy& Sons Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh as discussed in foregoing paras."

14. Further, learned counsel for the respondent submits that in light of the submissions made above, it is crystal clear that the dispute in the case of M/s Neogy and Sons (Supra) is totally different from the present case and as such, the petitioner cannot rely upon the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of M/s Neogy and Sons (Supra).

Hence, the show cause notice dated 21.10.2021 issued to the petitioner for the demand of service tax on the amount of MPGASTVA paid to the State Government for the financial year 2016-17 to 2017-18 (up to June 2017), which was confirmed vide Order- in- Original dated 29.12.2022, is correct.

18. The learned Authority has held that in the case of M/s Neogy and Sons (Supra), the Division Bench of this Court only held that the MPGASTVA, 2005 is intra vires, but the effect of service tax is liable to be decided by the Competent Authorities under the Goods and Services laws. The petitioners have approached this Court only on the plea that this Court in the case of M/s Neogy and Sons (Supra) held that the nature of levy under the MPGATSVA is a tax on land; therefore, the GST is not liable to be paid by the petitioners. The orders-in-original passed by the respondent-Authority are not orders without duration. The learned Authority has given its own interpretation to the amount collected under the Act and its utilisation. The said view is liable to be NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:35712 15 WP-4514-2023 re-examined by the Appellate Authority and thereafter, the GST Tribunal.