TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 679
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the said authority does not have the jurisdiction to pass the said order. It is the case of the petitioner that the subject is under Entry 92C of List I of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India which has been omitted by the 101st Amendment of the Constitution with effect from 16.09.2016. Therefore, after the said date the said respondent had no authority or power to levy service tax constitutionally. The petitioner has also based the challenge on the omission of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. It may however be mentioned that at the time of the arguments, it was additionally urged that there was non application of mind in making the impugned demand. 2. As per the facts projected, the petitioner was given a sub-contract by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by construing the entire job done by the petitioner as that of supply of manpower. He has also placed before this Court a bunch of work order to fortify his submission that the works in question were for construction of roads and for irrigation purpose. 5. The learned counsel has highlighted that the scope of work included bed preparation, concreting etc. whereas, for the supply of manpower there is a separate contract which is on "as per hour basis". He has also submitted that there are purchase orders for supply of materials which has also been included in the impugned levy. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the Notification dated 20.06.2012 which clearly exempts the construction of road under Clause 13(a) and for irrigation w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons stand dismissed. 35. Although the claim of the petitioners for interfering with the demand-cum-show cause notices had been refused but it is clarified that the respondents, if desire, may proceed ahead with the said demand-cum-show cause notices, and the same be done strictly in accordance with law, but from the point of view that the demand-cum-show cause notices came into effect from the date of this judgment." 7. On the aspect that the impugned order has not taken into consideration the works done for construction of roads and irrigation purpose, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that in the impugned order, the aforesaid contention has been adequately dealt with. He has submitted that the petitioner, as sub-contractor w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m 26AS of TDS is not applicable as the same is not the basis of the impugned levy. He has submitted that the competent authority had passed a confirmation order and the present levy is only on the aspect of supply of manpower and the entire value of the contract has not been taken into consideration. He has also submitted that in any case, the disputes are factual in nature and there is an avenue to prefer an appeal which has not been done by the petitioner. 9. The learned Standing Counsel has also placed the records of the case in original which have been perused. 10. Dr. Todi, the learned counsel has in his rejoinder has fairly accepted the first proposition that the contention regarding violation of the constitutional provision has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter, the levy was made. The observations which have been extracted above would clearly reveal that the authority was aware of the exemption provision and had given exemption to that component of the work consisting of construction of roads and irrigation work and it clearly appears that the levy is on the component of supply of workforce. 14. This Court is also of the considered opinion that though the petitioner has emphasized that the impugned levy is not on the aspect of supply of workforce alone, the said argument would be on the realm of factual disputes which cannot be gone into by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As noted above, it is a specific contention on part of the Revenue that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lishes the order which it considers to be without jurisdiction or palpably erroneous but does not substitute its own views for those of the inferior tribunal. The writ of certiorari can be issued if an error of law is apparent on the face of the record. A writ of certiorari, being a high prerogative writ, should not be issued on mere asking. 51. The second cardinal principle of exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is that in a given case, even if some action or order challenged in the writ petition is found to be illegal and invalid, the High Court while exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction thereunder can refuse to upset it with a view to doing substantial justice between the parties. Article ....