RADICO KHAITAN LTD. Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Shashi Prakash Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent nos. 5 and 6.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed by petitioner with following prayer :

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no GST is leviable on the sale of un-denatured ENA to liquor manufacturers. It is further contended that the respondent no. 1 issued notices dated 31.08.2019 (Annexure-2, 3 and 4 to the writ petition) under Section 61 of Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "UPGST Act") requiring the petitioner to explain as to why GST and penalty under Section 73 of the UPGST Act should not be levied on the sale of un-denatured ENA by it to liquor manufacturers for the period mentioned therein. It is next contended that in response to the notice dated 31.08.2019, the petitioner submitted his reply (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) in which he had categorically stated that no GST is leviable on the sale of un-denatured ENA and the issue of taxability of outward supply of of un-denatured ENA to liquor manufacturers is engaging the attention of Goods and Service Tax Council which has taken a decision to maintain status quo in this regard. However, the respondent no. 1 without considering the petitioner's reply submitted by it to the respondent no. 1 has issued the impugned show cause notice under Section 73 of the UPGST Act for determining the huge demand of GST, interest and penalty on the supply of un-denatured ENA by the petitioner to liquor manufacturers for the period stated therein.