Sahara Hospitality ltd. vs The State of Maharashtra

The writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by a public limited company, seeking several reliefs from the court.

Firstly, the applicant requests the court to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to review and annul the order dated 21.10.2020 (referred to as Annexure-A) issued by Respondent No. 2, presumably a government authority or official.

Secondly, the applicant asks the court to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other suitable writ, order, or direction to reassess the show cause notice dated 05.003.2020, alleging a lack of adherence to the principles of natural justice in the initial adjudication process.

Lastly, the applicant seeks a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction from the court. However, the specific relief requested under this section of the application is not provided in the excerpt provided.

In essence, the writ application aims to challenge the legality and validity of certain orders and notices issued by the authorities, highlighting potential violations of natural justice principles and seeking appropriate judicial intervention to address these grievances.

This writ application, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is brought forth by a public limited company seeking various reliefs from the court. The applicant requests the court to issue writs, orders, or directions to address several issues:

A. The applicant seeks to quash an order dated 21st October 2020 issued by Respondent No.2 (presumably a government authority). B. They ask for a re-adjudication of a show cause notice dated 5th March 2020, with adherence to the principles of natural justice. C. They request a writ of Mandamus or any appropriate order directing Respondent No.2 not to recover the amount imposed by the aforementioned order, and to stay execution and other proceedings. D. They seek to quash another order dated 24th November 2020, uploaded on the GST Portal by Respondent No.2. E. They aim to lift the attachment of their factory premises and quash a notice dated 17th December 2020, issued by Respondent No.2. F. Additionally, they request interim relief corresponding to the aforementioned prayers. G. They ask for costs associated with this petition. H. Lastly, they seek any other reliefs deemed necessary by the court based on the circumstances of the case.

The application also challenges the validity of a recovery notice issued on 17th December 2020, which included the attachment of the factory premises under Section 79 of the CGST Act, 2017. This attachment seems to stem from the order dated 21st October 2020, which was uploaded on the GST Portal on 24th November 2020.

The primary concern of this application revolves around the orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, presumably raising legal questions and procedural irregularities that the applicant wishes to address through judicial intervention.

This writ application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by a public limited company seeks several reliefs from the court. Firstly, it requests the court to quash an order dated 21st October 2020 issued by Respondent No. 2. Secondly, it seeks re-adjudication of a show cause notice dated 5th March 2020 while ensuring the principles of natural justice are followed. Thirdly, it asks for a directive preventing the recovery of the amount imposed by the aforementioned order dated 21st October 2020, pending the disposal of the petition. Fourthly, it seeks to quash an order dated 24th November 2020 uploaded on the GST Portal by Respondent No. 2. Fifthly, it requests the lifting of the attachment of its factory premises and the quashing of a notice dated 17th December 2020 issued by Respondent No. 2. Additionally, the application seeks interim reliefs, costs of the petition, and any other reliefs deemed necessary by the court.

The writ applicant challenges the validity of a recovery notice dated 17th December 2020, which includes the attachment of its factory premises under Section 79 of the CGST Act, 2017. This attachment appears to stem from the order dated 21st October 2020.

The main issue addressed in this application pertains to an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Enforcement) Division-6, Vadodara, on 21st October 2020. This order establishes the liability of the writ applicant to pay a specific amount towards service tax with penalty. The order determines that any lease or license to occupy land constitutes a supply of service under the SGST and CGST Acts of 2017. Additionally, it concludes that services provided by the applicant fall under a specific entry of the GST notification and are thus liable to tax. The order specifies the taxable value of the services provided and levies penalties accordingly.

The writ applicant challenges this order, alleging it was passed without affording them an opportunity to be heard. While the order is appealable under Section 107 of the Act, the court decided to entertain the writ application due to the lack of opportunity for the applicant to present their case.

In the proceedings, the court has heard arguments from Mr. Raichandani, the learned counsel representing the writ applicant.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit
Maharashtra High Court 

Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law: