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
HomeGSTPlea Challenging Order Levying GST On Royalty Paid On Mining Lease: Gujarat...

Plea Challenging Order Levying GST On Royalty Paid On Mining Lease: Gujarat High Court Restrains Dept. From Taking Coercive Action 

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Gujarat High Court has restrained the GST department from taking the coercive action in a plea challenging order levying GST on royalty paid on mining lease.

The bench of Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice D.N.Ray directed the GST Department not to take any coercive action in a challenge to the order levying GST on the royalty paid in the context of mining lease.

The petitioner has challenged the show cause notice and order issued under Section 74 of the Gujarat Goods and Sales Tax Act, 2017, for levy of GST on the royalty paid by the petitioner for quarry lease granted by the State Government.

The court issued the notice to the GST department.

It is worthwhile to note that no doubt the Supreme Court has upheld the levy of GST on royalty paid for mining rights basis, however, the issue related to the retrospective or prospective applicability of GST on mining lease/royalty is still pending before the Supreme Court.

Case Details

Case Title: Rainbow Infrastructure Versus Union Of India & Ors.

Case No.: R/Special Civil Application No. 536 Of 2025

Date: 17/01/2025

Counsel For Petitioner: Krutarth K Desai

Counsel For Respondent: Ankit Shah

Read More: GST Applicability On Namkeen | Gujarat High Court Grants Interim Relief to Balaji Wafers in ₹172 Crore GST Demand Dispute

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

Hybrid Seed Production on Leased Farmland Qualifies as Agricultural Activity: ITAT Deletes Addition

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Rajkot Bench, has held that income earned from...

S. 263 Revision Can’t Be Used for Fresh Fishing Inquiry When AO Has Already Examined Issues: ITAT Quashes PCIT Order

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the...

S. 271DA Penalty Notice Must Be Issued Within 6 Months of AO’s Reference; Karnataka High Court Quashes Time-Barred Cash Receipt Penalty

The Karnataka High Court has held that although penalty proceedings under Section 271DA of...

Delayed Compliance With Income Tax Notice Is Not Complete Failure: Penalty U/s 272A(1)(d) Dropped

The Income Tax Department has dropped penalty proceedings initiated under Section 272A(1)(d) of the...

More like this

Hybrid Seed Production on Leased Farmland Qualifies as Agricultural Activity: ITAT Deletes Addition

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Rajkot Bench, has held that income earned from...

S. 263 Revision Can’t Be Used for Fresh Fishing Inquiry When AO Has Already Examined Issues: ITAT Quashes PCIT Order

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the...

S. 271DA Penalty Notice Must Be Issued Within 6 Months of AO’s Reference; Karnataka High Court Quashes Time-Barred Cash Receipt Penalty

The Karnataka High Court has held that although penalty proceedings under Section 271DA of...