TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 474
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce Unit, Bihar, Patna, The Union of India through Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, The Secretary, Personnel and Pension Affairs Department, Government of India, New Delhi, The Principal Secretary to the Governor, Raj Bhawan, Bihar, Patna, The Director, Central Investigation Bureau, New Delhi For the Petitioner : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Lalit Kishore (PAAG) JUDGMENT ( Per Honourable Justice Smt. Anjana Mishra ) Alleging that loss of revenue of hundreds of crores has been caused to the State of Bihar by issuance of three notifications, Notification Nos. S.O.77, dated 13.09.2007 (Annexure-1), S.O.85, dated 13.09.2007 (Annexure-2) and S.O.65, dated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... into the role played by the then Chief Minister, Shri Nitish Kumar, and, later on, Chief Minister-cum- Finance Minister (from 16.06.2013 to 17.06.2014), Shri Sushil Kumar Modi, the then Deputy Chief Minister-cum-Finance and Commercial Tax Minister, Shri Vijayendra Yadav, Finance Minister-cum-Commercial Tax Minister, concerned Political Head and Executive Head, concerned Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, concerned Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department and other concerned officers, who were, according to the petitioner, involved in issuance of the said unauthorized notifications contained in Annexur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s made by the petitioner, vide letters dated 02.04.2014 and 04.04.2014 (Annexures 6 and 7 respectively). 7. We have heard Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Principal Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State and perused the materials on record. 8. The State of Bihar have seriously contested the matter and stated, in their counter affidavit, that the petitioner"s application, seeking extraordinary remedy on the pretext of public interest, was wholly misconceived as they have no locus standi to contest the matter. The allegation that the rate of tax on stone chips and stone boulders was reduced from 12.5% to 4% under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005, vide notification, dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lasters and stone boulders was 8%. 12. It is further submitted that with the new Government taking over in November, 2005, gave top priority to construction and maintenance of roads and, keeping in view the high cost of construction and maintenance of roads, the Government decided to reduce the rate of tax on stone chips. Other items were also considered by the Government and the Government decided to reduce/alter the rates of tax on such items. Accordingly, keeping in view the priorities of the State Government, six draft notifications were sent to the Office of the Advocate General, which also included the proposal for reduction of tax on various items under different enactments, including proposal for reduction of rate of tax on stone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Cabinet note) to the draft of the six proposed notifications and photo copies of the draft notifications have been attached to the counter affidavit as "Ka" to "Cha". Finally, the Council of Ministers, in its meeting, dated 11.09.2007, vide Agenda No.26, approved the Cabinet note, which would be manifest from the perusal of the original records, which were produced before this Court (Flag-3 at page 44 of the original file). 16. Thus, it is contended that the draft, for reduction of tax under the VAT Act on the aforesaid items from 12.5% to 4% as well as reduction of Entry Tax from 8% to 4%, were duly prepared by the Administrative Department, which was consciously deliberated upon and vetted by the Law Department and Advocate General and....