2018 (12) TMI 1603 – SIKKIM HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. J216 (Sikkim) – The Chief Commissioner and the Senior Joint Commissioner, Large Tax Payer Unit, GST, Government of West Bengal, shall be impleaded as party Respondents in the present proceeding – Application is allowed. – WP (C) No. 36 of 2017 Dated:- 27-9-2018 – MRS. MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI AND MR. BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JJ. For Petitioners : Mr. Karma Sonam Lhendup, Advocate. Ms. Tashi Doma Sherpa, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. B. K. Gupta Advocate, Mr. Thinlay Dorjee Bhutia, Government Advocate, Mr. S. K. Chettri Assistant Government Advocate, Mrs. Pollin Rai Assistant Government Advocate, Ms. Karma Yangchen Bhutia, Advocate, Mr. Manish Kr. Jain, Advocate, Ms. Ranjeeta Kumari, Advocate ORDER I.A. No.01 of 2017 and I.A. No.05 of 2018 I.A. No.01 of 2017 and I.A. No.05 of 2018 are not pressed by Learned Counsel for the Petitioners. In the circumstance, I.A. No.01 of 2017 and I.A. No.05 of 2018 stand disposed of. I.A No.10 of
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ST Council under the Constitution and keeping in mind the federal structure of the Constitution neither the Union of India nor any State can give preference to one State over the other. It is also pleaded that the impugned Notifications have been passed on the recommendations of the GST Council. The application under consideration states that the GST Council is a statutory body whose duty has been enumerated as making recommendations to the Union and the States on inter alia (a) the taxes, cesses and surcharges levied which may be subsumed in the GST (b) the goods and services that may be subjected to or exempted from the GST and (c) special provision with respect to the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. It is further submitted that the Respondent No.2 in its counter affidavit has annexed the minutes of the 18th meeting of the GST Council and it is alleged that the submissio
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
following allegations against Senior Joint Commissioner, Large Tax Payer Unit, GST, as well as Chief Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax, West Bengal in the following manner:- 6. That on 08.02.2018, the representative of Petitioner No.1 after being verbally summoned to the office of the Senior Joint Commissioner, Large Tax Payer Unit, GST, directed the representatives of the Petitioner No.1 to ask their Director, Mr. S. Martin to be present before him on 12.02.2018 and 13.02.2018. On both these occasions, the Director of the Petitioner No.1 was present, where the Director was pressurized to forthwith deposit the amount of GST that according to the Senior Joint Commissioner, Large Tax Payer Unit, GST had fallen due under the impugned Act and the notifications, at the rate of 28%. All his fervent pleas for keeping in abeyance the issue of GST till final adjudication in the instant writ petition were brushed aside and finally on 15.02.2018, the Petitioner No.1 agreed to pay the GST. 7.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s against Petitioners and hence the Chief Commissioner of Goods and Service tax, West Bengal and the Senior Joint Commissioner, Large Tax Payer Unit, GST have become proper and necessary parties for the purpose of adjudication of the instant writ. The affidavit in opposition filed on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and the GST Council merely states that the averments made therein except for those matter of records are not accepted. The State of West Bengal through the Finance Secretary is Respondent No.7 in the Writ Petition. The Petitioner seeks a prayer to hold and declare that the provisions of serial No.6 of Schedule III read with Section 7 (2) of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (SGST Act) of the State of West Bengal exempting actionable claims as activities or transactions which shall be treated neither as supply of goods nor a supply or service but not excluding lottery from such exemption is unconstitutional, illegal and non-est as lotteries cannot at all be subjected t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =