Not ultra-vire to constitution: SC overturns a verdict of HP High Court
2 min read
Shimla, May 3 – Supreme Court of India overturned a judgment of Himachal Pradesh High Court during a recent ruling in the State of HP verses A J Infrastructures matter.
Division Bench of Apex Court comprised by Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta overturned the impugned verdict of the Himachal Pradesh High Court which had held Sec. 16B of HP GST Sarfaraj Act and ultra vires the provisions of Constitution.
SC said in a order passed on May 1 that Sec 16B of HP GST Act establishes that regardless of any contrary provision in any current law, any tax amount, penalty, or interest owed by a dealer under the Act should be the first charge on the property of the dealer.
SC ruling against the verdict said that said section of GST HP GST Act) is not in violation of any provision of law including the SARFAESI Act and the Constitution of India.
Bench giving final verdict in favour of state said that provisions notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force, any amount of tax and penalty including interest, if any, payable by a dealer or any other person under Act, should be a first charge on the property of the dealer.
However SC examined whether the dismissal of the review petition for recall instituted by High Court suffers from any infirmity, legal or otherwise held that court was justified in rejecting the application for recall as no error apparent on the face of the record was pointed out, while seeking the review.
Decision also mentioned that SLP filed by the State against the HC verdict became partially infructuous since PNB, a contesting respondent in the case, had already recovered its dues and released the property from its hypothecation during the pendency of the writ petition in HC.
” HP High Court had made a ruling on an infructuous writ petition and had unjustifiably outlawed the rightful Sec 16B of the HP GST Act. ” apex court order stated that since the petition was rendered infructuous before the HC ruling, it was unnecessary for the court to determine the validity of Sec 16B .
