Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTRajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging GST On Mining Services At...

Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging GST On Mining Services At SCN Stage

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Jaipur Bench of Rajasthan High Court in the case of M/s Barminco Indian Underground Mining Services LLP Versus Deputy Commissioner has dismissed writ petition challenging GST on mining services at the stage of show cause notice.

The bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Uma Shanker Vyas has it is not a case where the authority concerned lacks jurisdiction. It is not a case where mala fides have been alleged. In the absence of there being a case of violation of principles of natural justice.

The petitioner/assessee approached the High Court by way of Writ Petition challenging the Show Cause Notice issued alleging that the expats payments made by the petitioner to its overseas employees being foreign nationals for providing the mechanized underground mining services is not chargeable to tax under the GST regime in view of provisions contained in Clause 1 of the Schedule III of the CGST Act. 

On the other hand, the department has asserted that the petitioner company has imported the services from related person i.e. from its parent Australia based company and the same is chargeable to tax under section 5 of the IGST Act read with section 7(1)(b)&(c)) and Clause 4 of the Schedule I of the CGST Act. Expats payments made by the petitioner company are relevant under section 15 of the CGST Act for the valuation of the services so imported by the petitioner to enable it to provide its output services in taxable territory.

The court dismissed the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a reply to show cause notice.

Read More: Once Matter Is Dropped At ASMT-10 Level, No Further Proceedings Can Be Initiated U/S 74 Of GST Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Details

Case Title: M/s Barminco Indian Underground Mining Services LLP Versus Deputy Commissioner

Case No.: D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17391/2024

Date:  03/12/2024

Counsel For Appellant: Shashi Mathew 

Counsel For Respondent: Naresh Gupta, Advocate, Sr. Standing Counsel

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GSTAT Dismisses Dept. Appeal Over Rs. 7.35 Lakh Interest Demand as Below Rs. 20 Lakh Monetary Limit

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has dismissed a Revenue...

GST Refund Can’t Be Denied by Questioning ITC Eligibility Without S. 73 or 74 Proceedings: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has held that a...

Education Provider Need Not Be University to Claim Service Tax Exemption for Recognised Degree Courses: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has held that...

Subsequent Deposit of Full 10% Meets Mandatory Pre-Deposit Requirement: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)...

More like this

GSTAT Dismisses Dept. Appeal Over Rs. 7.35 Lakh Interest Demand as Below Rs. 20 Lakh Monetary Limit

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has dismissed a Revenue...

GST Refund Can’t Be Denied by Questioning ITC Eligibility Without S. 73 or 74 Proceedings: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has held that a...

Education Provider Need Not Be University to Claim Service Tax Exemption for Recognised Degree Courses: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has held that...