Sai Enterprises Vs. The Union of India and Ors. – Gauhati High Court

(2023) taxcode.in 06 HC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI

Sai Enterprises
v.
The Union of India and Ors.

WP(C)/5675/2022 and ors.
Decided on 02-Mar-23

Mr. Justice Achintya Malla Bujor Barua

Judgment/Order:

O R D E R

02.03.2023

Heard Dr. A Saraf, learned senior counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 2005/2021, WP(C) No.7065/2021, WP(C) No.234/2022, WP(C) No.241/2022, WP(C) No.379/2022, WP(C) No.383/2022, WP(C) No.396/2022, WP(C) No.428/2022, WP(C) No.431/2022, WP(C) No.444/2022, WP(C) No.777/2022, WP(C) No.946/2022, WP(C) No.1265/2022, WP(C) No.1280/2022, WP(C) No.1530/2022, WP(C) No.1865/2022, Ms. Nita Hawelia and Ms. Medha Lila Gope, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 5675/2022, WP(C) No.890/2021, WP(C) No.4140/2022, WP(C) No.4193/2022, Mr. S Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.605/2022, WP(C) No.1486/2022, WP(C) No.1537/2022, WP(C) No.7601/2022, WP(C) No.7602/2022, WP(C) No.7603/2022, WP(C) No.7604/2022, WP(C) No.7629/2022, WP(C) No.7630/2022, Mr. D Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 1572/2022, WP(C) No.1899/2022, WP(C) No.3004/2022, WP(C) No.3005/2022, WP(C) No.4629/2022, Mr. A Todi, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.679/2022, WP(C) No.1668/2022, Mr. D Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.1518/2022, Mr. B Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.779/2022, Ms. S Newar, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.541/2023, Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.551/2023, Mr. D Das, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.436/2022 and Mr. A Senapati, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.8216/2022.

2. One of the issues involved in these batch of writ petitions is whether the units who had utilized their CENVAT credit for the purpose of payment of taxes with reference to the exemption notification dated 25.07.2007, but the stage to pay the taxes by cash after exhausting the CENVAT credit was yet to come, can be construed that the units have availed the benefit under the notification dated 25.07.2007, with reference to the subsequent scheme dated 05.10.2017. If the conclusion would have been that this category of units had availed the benefit under the notification dated 25.07.2007, the implication thereof would be that there would be an entitlement to the benefits as provided under the budgetary scheme dated 05.10.2017 and to the contrary, had the decision been otherwise that they are not the units who have availed the benefits, the consequence may be that they would not be entitled to the benefits under the budgetary scheme dated 05.10.2017.

3. A communication dated 22.02.2023 from the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade made by the Director and addressed to the Commissioner, CBIC, D/o Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi is placed on record before the Court.

4. A reading of the said communication dated 22.02.2023 makes it discernible that a decision had been taken that even in respect of those units who had paid their tax dues pursuant to the earlier exemption notification dated 25.07.2007 by utilizing the CENVAT credit, but the stage to pay the further taxes by means of cash was yet to come, would be considered by the authorities to be units who have availed the benefits under the earlier exemption notification dated 25.07.2007.

5. As the decision contained in the communication dated 22.02.2023 answers the issue that was before the Court that such units should also be considered to be units who have availed the benefits under the exemption notification dated 25.07.2007, we are of the view that, having accepted the contents of the communication dated 22.02.2023, no further adjudication is required in these batch of writ petitions.

6. The consequence of such units being considered to be units who have availed the benefits under the exemption notification dated 25.07.2007 would be that such units, including the writ petitioners herein, would be entitled to all such entitlements, legal consequences etc of being considered to be units who have availed the benefits under the exemption notification dated 25.07.2007 and the respondent authorities may do the needful accordingly.

7. In view of the above, all the writ petitions stand closed. However, liberty is granted to the writ petitioners to approach again, if so advised. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

A copy of the communication dated 22.02.2023 is kept on record.

Original judgment copy is available here.