Shri Samir Chandra Saha, S/o Lt. Dhirendra Chandra Saha V. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Finance and The Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax and The Assistant Commissioner Central Goods and Service Tax, Tripura Division and The Superintendent of Goods and Service Tax, Range Agartala-II and The Superintendent of (Enforcement), Central Goods and Service Tax Tripura Division and The Chairman cum Managing Director Tripura State Electrical Corporation Ltd. and Shri Samir Saha, Contractor

WP(C)/428/2022

AI Insights

The case revolves around a mix-up in the attribution of contract works between two contractors with similar names, Shri Samir Chandra Saha and Shri Samir Saha, both enlisted under the Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited (TSECL). The petitioner, Shri Samir Chandra Saha, a registered contractor, was erroneously identified by TSECL as the contractor for various works awarded to Shri Samir Saha. This error led to the tax authorities issuing a demand notice to the wrong individual. Upon realization of the mistake, TSECL acknowledged the error and communicated it to the tax authorities. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the demand notice, which was found to be based on incorrect information. The court's decision rectified the attribution of the contracts and cleared the petitioner's name.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799964 (HC-TRIPURA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: N MAJUMDER; BISWANATH MAJUMDER
• Assessee Lawyers: T K DEB
• Keywords: Contractor; Goods and Service Tax; Jurisdiction; TSECL; Erroneous information

Judgement Text

"1 HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) No. 428 of 2022 Shri Samir Chandra Saha, S/o Lt. Dhirendra Chandra Saha, Resident of Flat No. 151, Type -A4, Tower No. 1, Shyamalima Residential Complex, New Capital Complex, (North side), Agartala, P.O and P.S N.C.C, 799010, Tripura (W). -----Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Finance, North Block, New Delhi-110001. 2.The Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Jackson Gate Building, 3rd Floor, Lenin Sarani Old. Municipality Road, Agartala, Tripura West-799001 3.The Assistant Commissioner Central Goods and Service Tax, Tripura Division, Agartala, 3rd Floor, Jackson Gate Building, Lenin Sarani, Agartala-79900 4.The Superintendent of Goods and Service Tax , Range Agartala-II, Joynagar Middle Road, Agartala, 799001 5.The Superintendent of (Enforcement), Central Goods and Service Tax Tripura Division, Agartala, 3rd Floor, Jackson Gate Building, Lenin Sarani, Agartala-79900 6.The Chairman cum Managing Director Tripura State Electrical Corporation Ltd., North Banamalipur, Agartala, PO-Agartala, District- West Tripura, 799001 2 7.Shri Samir Saha, Contractor, PO-Dharmanagar, PS- Khowai, District- Khowai. -----Respondent(s) B E F O R E HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.INDRAJIT MAHANTY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.CHATTOPADHYAY For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.K.Deb, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N.Majumder, Advocate. Mr. Biswanath Majumder, CGC. O R D E R 29.08.2022 (Indrajit Mahanty,CJ) Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. The writ petition came to be filed by the petitioner namely, Sri Samir Chandra Saha, son of Late Dhirendra Chandra Saha, a registered contractor and enlisted under the Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd.(TSECL, for short) for carrying out various works contract under the said corporation. Apart from the same, the petitioner also claims to have undertaken contract works for various other government departments. It is asserted on behalf of the petitioner that there is also another contractor who enlisted with the TSECL namely, Sri Samir Saha who is also an enlisted contractor under TSECL, 3 resident of Village & P.O: Durganagar P.S. Khowai, District: Khowai and the said Samir Saha had been awarded with various contracts under the TSECL. However, it appears that the Deputy General Manager (Civil) of TSECL had erroneously informed the various tax authorities, [Respondents 2 to 5] that the job contract awarded to Samir Saha (non petitioner) [Respondent-7], indicated to have been granted to the petitioner. Pursuant to direction issued by this Court to TSECL to verify as to whether such error has been committed by them in informing the taxing authorities, respondents herein, a note has been prepared on behalf of the TSECL to the following effect dated 05.07.2022: “TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED Note-7 Please refer Note No.03 related to Case No.WP(C)428 of 2022. During thorough checking of the bills raised by both the Petitioner Sri Samir Chandra Saha and the respondent No.7, Samir Saha, it is found that the PAN no. was to be communicated with Income Tax Dept. during quarterly filing of TDS for the 4th Qtr. Of the F.Y.2014-15, 1st qtr of the F.Y. 2015-16, 3rd qtr. Of the F.Y.2016-17 was of Sri Samir Saha. 4 But, due to nearly same name of both of the parties, mistakenly the PAN No.(AHPPS4894Q) of Sri Samir Chandra Saha was quoted instead of the PAN No.(AVCPS1828F) of Sri Samir Saha during TDS filing records sent to the TDS Filler appointed by TSECL. As the said mistake was not communicated by any one of the agencies, the discrepancy remained unnoticed for such a long period. Now, as noticed, this office has immediately taken the matter to the Tax Filling agency for necessary corrective measure which will be initiated very shortly. Sd/-(illegible) Deputy General Manager .........................................” Since TSECL has recognized its own error of communication and ascribed the contract work to have been performed by the petitioner, consequently notices have come to be issued to the petitioner under Annexure-15, dated 7th March, 2022. Since the the Assessment order and the demand notice was based upon an erroneous information received by the Assessing authority from TSECL, this Court considers the same to be without jurisdiction and based on an erroneous information which admittedly TSECL had provided to the taxing authority. Accordingly, impugned order and demand notice under Annexure-15 is quashed and the Revenue authorities are free to proceed 5 against the actual contractor namely, Samir Saha, Respondent-7, in accordance with law. The writ petition is allowed in terms of the directions noted hereinabove. (S.G.CHATTOPADHYAY), J (INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ Saikat Sarma "