Rajeev Yuvajana Sangham vs The State of AP

Heard Sri Sreekanth Reddy Ambati, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Transport appearing for respondent No.1, Sri N. Sri Hari, learned Standing Counsel for Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4, and Sri S.A.V.Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing Sri Y.N.Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for respondent No.5, and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

2. The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“…… to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more  particularly one in the nature of “Writ of Mandamus”  declaring the action of the Respondents in demanding  Central GST and AP GST of 9% each, totaling 18% on the  monthly license fee collected from the Petitioner for the  work contract of maintenance of toilets at 4th Respondent  Bus Station, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the  exemption granted by the Government of India, Ministry of  Finance through its Notification No.12/2017-Central Tax  (Rate), Dt.28.06.2017, and G.O.Ms.No.588 dated 12.12.2017,  issued by Revenue (Commercial Taxes-II) Department,  Government of A.P., contrary to the order passed by this  Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.3197 of 2019 and to pass ……”

4. The averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition disclose that the petitioner was awarded contracts of cleaning toilets in different bus stations under respondent No.2. The petitioner is punctual in paying rents including 18% G.S.T. i.e., 9% Central G.S.T. and 9% A.P. State G.S.T., as demanded by the respondents. While things stood thus, the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), through its Notification No.12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017, exempted G.S.T. for the service under Heading 9994, serial No.76, which refers to “Services by way of public conveniences such as provision of facilities of bathroom, washrooms, lavatories, urinal or toilets.” Similar exemption was granted by the State of Andhra Pradesh through G.O.Ms.No.588, Revenue (Commercial Taxes-II) Department, dated 12.12.2017. Since the demand notice issued on 10.06.2022 refers to demand of G.S.T. in spite of the notifications issued above, the present writ petition came to be filed.

4. No counters are filed in spite of taking time.

4. The short point that arises for consideration is: “Whether the authorities were right in demanding G.S.T. on the monthly license fee paid by the petitioner?”

6.  POINT:-

Sri Sreekanth Reddy Ambati, learned counsel for the petitioner, mainly submits that in view of Notification No.12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017, issued by the Government of India and G.O.Ms.No.588, dated 12.12.2017, issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the petitioner is exempted from payment of G.S.T.

7. The same is strongly opposed by Sri S.A.V.Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing Sri Y.N.Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for respondent No.5, stating that the notifications relied upon by the petitioner do not apply to the case on hand

For Reference Visit: 
Andhra Pradesh High Court

Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law