{W.P.(T)No.203/2021} 2025:CGHC:15237-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 203 of 2021 M/s Dolomite Mining Corporation, a Partnership firm, having its Registered Office at Baradwar, P.O. Janjgir-Champa, P.S. Baradwar, District Janjgir, in the State of Chhattisgarh – 495687, represented through its Authorised Signatory Sri T.T. Rao, son of Sri Suryanarayana Rao, Aged about 71 years, resident of at House No.55, Surajmukhi, Rajkishore, Lingiyadihi, Bilaspur – 495006, in the State of Chhattisgarh, who is a citizen of India. --- Petitioner versus 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), 137, North Block, New Delhi – 110001. 2. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice, 4th Floor, A Wing, Rajendra Prasad Road, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 001. 3. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (formerly Central Board of Excise and Customs), Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi-110001. 4. The Principal Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, C.E. Building, Tikra Para, Dhamtari Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492001. 5. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax Division, Bilaspur, Central GST & Central Excise Division, GST Building, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6. The Superintendent (Tech.), Office of the Assistant Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, GST Bhawan, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents SISTA SOMAYAJULU Digitally signed by SISTA SOMAYAJULU Date: 2025.04.02 10:33:37 +0530 {W.P.(T)No.203/2021} For Petitioner : Mr. Virendra Verma, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Standing Counsel for Central GST & Central Excise and Ms. Annapurna Tiwari, Central Government Counsel. Division Bench: - Hon'ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, JJ. Order On Board (01/04/2025) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner herein challenging the show cause notice issued by the Government of India calling upon him to show cause and explain in writing why total service tax ₹ 20,41,943/- should not be demanded and recovered from him; why interest should not be charged and recovered from him on the delayed payment of the said service tax amount; why penalty should not be imposed; why late fees should not be imposed; and why penalty should not be imposed for having failed to obtain Service Tax Registration. 2. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that meanwhile, the issue involved in this writ petition has been decided by the Supreme Court in the matter of Mineral Area Development Authority and another (Enforcement Order) v. Steel {W.P.(T)No.203/2021} Authority of India and another1 and in that view of the matter, the petitioner be relegated to respondents No.2 to 4 to file reply to the show cause notice. 3. The petitioner is at liberty to file reply to the show cause notice within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, which shall be considered by the respondent authorities, in accordance with law. 4. With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s). 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE JUDGE Soma 1 (2024) 10 SCC 257