Sanathan Textile Pvt. Ltd VS Union Of India

The petition before the Hon’ble High Court seeks several reliefs regarding the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. First, it requests a writ of declaration or any appropriate direction declaring Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, Section 5, and Section 7(2) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, as unconstitutional. It argues that these provisions violate Article 246, 246A, and 269A of the Constitution of India.

Secondly, the petition seeks a writ of certiorari or any suitable writ or order to quash the assessment of duties and Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) under the impugned Bills of Entry by Respondent No.2 (specified in Exhibit A). This relief is sought on the grounds that the assessment is allegedly unreasonable, discriminatory, arbitrary, oppressive, excessive, premeditated, and lacks authority under Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of trade), 265 (taxation principles), and 300A (right to property) of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner contends that these actions and provisions are detrimental and unlawful, thus necessitating intervention by the High Court to uphold constitutional principles and protect the rights of the petitioner.

The petition before this Hon’ble High Court seeks several reliefs concerning the constitutionality and legality of certain provisions and actions under Indian tax laws. Firstly, it requests a declaration that Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, Section 5, and Section 7(2) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are unconstitutional. The petitioner argues that these provisions violate Article 246, Article 246A, and Article 269A of the Constitution of India.

Secondly, the petition seeks a writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ to quash the assessment of duties and Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) made under the impugned Bills of Entry by the Respondent No.2. The grounds cited include violations of Articles 14 (Right to Equality), 19 (Protection of Certain Rights Regarding Freedom of Speech, etc.), 265 (Taxation not to be arbitrary), and 300A (Person not to be deprived of property save by authority of law) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner argues that the assessments were unreasonable, discriminatory, arbitrary, oppressive, excessive, premeditated, and conducted without the authority of law.

Furthermore, the petitioner requests an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Mandamus or otherwise, directing the respondents to re-assess the impugned Bills of Entry issued by Respondent No.2, considering the exemption to IGST retrospectively as per Notification No. 79/2017-Cus dated 13.10.2017. Additionally, the petitioner seeks the refund of duties and taxes paid, which they contend were wrongly levied.

In summary, the petitioner urges the court to declare certain statutory provisions unconstitutional, invalidate the assessments under the impugned Bills of Entry, and direct the re-assessment with retrospective application of relevant exemptions, along with the refund of duties and taxes paid.

The petition before the Hon’ble High Court seeks several reliefs regarding the constitutionality and application of certain provisions under Indian tax and customs laws. Firstly, it requests a declaration that Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, Section 5, and Section 7(2) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are unconstitutional, alleging they violate Article 246, 246A, and 269A of the Constitution of India.

Secondly, the petition seeks a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writs to quash the assessment of duties and Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) imposed under Bills of Entry, arguing violations of Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (right to freedom), 265 (taxation without authority of law), and 300A (right to property) due to the assessment being unreasonable, discriminatory, arbitrary, oppressive, excessive, premeditated, and lacking lawful authority.

Furthermore, the petition requests a mandamus or similar order directing the respondents to reassess the Bills of Entry in question, considering the retrospective effect of the IGST exemption introduced by Notification No. 79/2017-Cus dated October 13, 2017, and to grant refunds of duties and taxes paid by the petitioner.

The background of the case involves the importation of capital goods under the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCG Scheme), which historically exempted such imports from additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act. The petitioner availed of this scheme, which aimed to allow duty-free importation. However, amendments introduced under the GST regime altered these provisions, imposing Integrated Tax and Goods and Services Compensation Cess on such imports under amended Sections 3(7) and 3(9) of the Customs Tariff Act, alongside corresponding amendments in relevant notifications.

In summary, the petition challenges the constitutionality and application of these amendments, seeking relief from their adverse impact on the petitioner’s import transactions under the EPCG Scheme, emphasizing the retrospective application of exemptions and the alleged infringement of constitutional rights.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law

GST Case Law: