2009 (9) TMI 216

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the amount of Rs. 60,19,872/ on account of service tax along with interest at 12% from the date of first payment of the service tax which has been declined on behalf of DDA by office of the Executive Engineer, South Eastern Division No. 7 contending that as per terms and conditions of the agreement with M/s. Brahmputra Infrastructure Ltd./petitioner service tax is not payable by the DDA. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has retied on the letter dated 17th September, 2007 stipulating that the letter dated 25th July, 2007, 28th July, 2007 and 3rd September, 2007 shall form part of the agreement. Admittedly the written agreement between the parties does not stipulate that service tax shall be payable to the petitioner by the respon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... may be entitled to recover damages which contention was rejected by the Supreme Court. The case of the petitioner is apparently distinguishable as petitioner is claiming service tax from the respondent, where the respondent/DDA is denying any liability to pay the service tax as the liability of the payment of service tax is not stipulated in the agreement between the parties and even the correspondence between the parties which had been made part of the agreement by letter dated 17th September, 2007 do not impose the liability of the service tax on the respondent. By letter dated 28th July, 2007 on which the petitioner relies to claim service tax, did not admit the liability of DDA to pay the service tax as by said letter the petitioner ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....discretionary jurisdiction is to be exercised or refused to be exercised by the High Court, it is to be deter mined having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. The High Court can entertain a writ petition if it is shown that there is something more which goes to the root of the jurisdiction or something which would show that it would be a case of palpable injustice to the writ petitioner to force him to adopt the remedies provided under the civil law. Admittedly in the present case the petitioner has not contended that, any provision of law is ultra vires and has not sought quashing of the same nor it can be inferred that the denial of the alleged payment to petitioner of service tax and the interest thereon is in violation of....