Constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) and Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 challenged before Gauhati High Court: Let us hope for the best

Section 16(2)(c) and Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 has been one of the biggest disruptors in the business now.

The constitutional validity of section 16(2)(aa) of the CGST Act 2017 w.e.f. 01.01.2022 was challenged in a recent case of M/S MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED Vs. UOI & 3 others, filed before the Gauhati High Court. Along with this, the vires of section 16(2)(c) and Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

Appreciably, the Hon’ble Chief Justice after hearing the arguments of the appellant was pleased to issue notice to the respondent departments’ returnable on 01.11.2022.

The Hon’ble Chief Justice was concern with the issue as to that whether the GST has been paid by the supplier to the Government is something the recipient cannot check for want of any mechanism in the statue and that similar petitions were pending before other HC also.

Let us hope something big comes out in the benefit of the taxpayers.

The copy of the order is as under:

ORDER

Date :  05.09.2022

(R.M. Chhaya, CJ.) Heard Mr. A. Kanodia, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Issue notice, returnable on 01.11.2022.

Mr. S. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. H. Gupta, learned Central Government counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.1; Mr. B. Gogoi, learned standing counsel, Finance & Taxation Department, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.2 and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned standing counsel, Central Goods & Service Tax, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 & 4.

Since all the respondents are duly represented, no formal steps need be taken. J

UDGE CHIEF  JUSTICE

The copy is attached herewith:

Attachments area

 

Constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) and Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 challenged before Gauhati High Court: Let us hope for the best