Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited VS Commissioner of Commercial Tax

M/s Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd., a registered business entity under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime in Chhattisgarh, is involved in import and export activities across various ports in India, including Paradip Port in Odisha. The petitioner had received taxable services from Paradip Port Trust (PPT) and was issued an intra-State invoice. However, desiring an inter-State invoice, the petitioner pursued legal recourse by approaching the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

The Delhi High Court directed the petitioner to seek resolution for their grievance from the jurisdictional GST Commissioner. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a representation to the appropriate authority, presumably the GST Commissioner, seeking resolution of their issue regarding the nature of the invoice issued by PPT for the services provided.

This summary encapsulates the petitioner’s efforts to address their concerns regarding the type of invoice issued by PPT, as well as their compliance with the legal directives provided by the Delhi High Court and subsequent actions taken before the jurisdictional GST Commissioner.

The petitioner, M/s Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd., operates as a registered business entity under the GST regime in Chhattisgarh, engaging in import and export activities across various ports in India, including the Paradip Port in Odisha. The petitioner encountered an issue regarding the issuance of intra-State invoices by the Paradip Port Trust (PPT) for certain taxable services supplied to them. Seeking inter-State invoices instead, the petitioner initially approached the High Court of Delhi, which directed them to address the matter with the jurisdictional GST Commissioner.

Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Commissioner of CT & GST, Odisha, who, in turn, advised the PPT to issue inter-State IGST invoices to the petitioner rather than intra-State CGST/SGST invoices. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) had also clarified the issue and directed the petitioner to resolve it directly with the PPT based on the circular issued.

Meanwhile, the petitioner filed a writ petition (W.P.(C) No.8183 of 2018) in the Delhi High Court. Following a court order on August 6, 2018, a clarification was issued to the PPT by the Commissionerate of CT & GST, Odisha, on October 9, 2018. This clarification highlighted that the nature of the supply constituted a service in the course of interstate trade or commerce under Section 7(3) of the IGST Act, advising the PPT to treat such services as interstate supply and collect IGST instead of CGST and SGST.

Further, on January 21, 2019, the Commissionerate of CT & GST reiterated the advice to the petitioner. Despite these efforts, it appears that the issue persisted, leading to ongoing attempts by the petitioner to address the matter through legal and administrative channels.

This summary encapsulates the petitioner’s efforts to resolve a discrepancy in the issuance of invoices by the Paradip Port Trust, involving interactions with tax authorities and legal proceedings in the Delhi High Court. Despite directives and advice from various authorities, the issue remains unresolved, prompting continued engagement from the petitioner to seek a satisfactory resolution.

The petitioner, M/s Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd., a registered business under GST in Chhattisgarh, engages in import and export activities through various Indian ports, including Paradip Port in Odisha. They had received intra-state invoices for certain taxable services from Paradip Port Trust (PPT) in Odisha, which they sought to convert into inter-state invoices. Initially, the petitioner approached the High Court of Delhi, which directed them to address their concerns to the jurisdictional GST Commissioner. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Commissioner of CT & GST, Odisha, who advised the PPT to issue inter-state IGST invoices instead of intra-state CGST/SGST invoices.

Meanwhile, the petitioner had filed a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi, leading to a clarification issued to PPT by the Commissionerate of CT & GST, Odisha, advising them to treat the supply of services to the petitioner as inter-state supply and collect IGST instead of CGST and SGST. Following this, the Commissionerate of CT & GST advised the GST Council Commissioner on the matter, resulting in a clarification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) on June 28, 2019.

During the court proceedings, the counsel representing PPT assured that they would abide by the guidance of CBIC. Given that CBIC had already provided clarification, the court directed PPT to comply with CBIC’s advice and amend all of the petitioner’s invoices from July 2017 onwards to incorporate the levy of 18% IGST instead of 9% CGST and 9% SGST, as per the IGST Act. The court mandated that these corrections be made within eight weeks, with manual corrections by the State Commissionerate if necessary, and instructed the opening of the GST portal if required for this purpose.

Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in accordance with the aforementioned directives. Additionally, due to the ongoing COVID-19 restrictions, the court allowed the parties to utilize a printout of the order available on the High Court’s website, subject to attestation by the respective advocate, as per the prescribed procedure outlined in the court’s notices.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: