Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Round-Up November 4 - November 10 2024

Nominal Index:Virender Singh and others. Versus State of H.P. and another 2024 LIveLaw (HP) 58Su-Kam Power System Ltd. & Another versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 59National Highway Authority of India v. Narayan Das 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 60NHPC Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 61M/s A.M. Enterprises v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 62Tushar Sharma v. State Bank of India 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 63Kundlas Loh Udyog vs. Union of India and others 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 64Su-Kam Power System Ltd. and Anr.v.State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 65Sumeet Kumar & Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 66The State of H.P. & Anr. V. M/s Garg Sons Estate Promoters Pvt. Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 67Dharmesh Sharma Vs Tanisha Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 68Navya & others Vs State of H.P. & others 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 69National Highway Authority Of India vs Rishi Singh & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 70State of H.P. and another v. M/s Gurcharan Industries 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 71M/s Lakhwinder Singh Stone Crusher v. Union of India & ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 72Judgments/Orders:Criminal Complaint Cannot Be Quashed Solely On Grounds Of Being Initiated Due To Political Vendetta: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: Virender Singh and others. Versus State of H.P. and anotherCitation: 2024 LIveLaw (HP) 58The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that a criminal complaint cannot be quashed solely because it was initiated due to political rivalry. The court was hearing a petition for the quashing of an FIR filed against the petitioners under Section 39(1)(a) of the Himachal Pradesh Excise Act and Section 171E read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR stemmed from allegations that the petitioners had distributed liquor during Panchayat elections to influence voters.Tax Department Can't Create Charge On Property Of Corporate Debtor During Currency Of Moratorium Imposed By NCLT: Himachal Pradesh HCCase Title: Su-Kam Power System Ltd. & Another versus State of Himachal Pradesh & OthersCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 59The Himachal High Court held that once the corporate debtor is directed to be liquidated by the NCLT u/s 33(5) of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC), no legal proceeding could be instituted by or against him by the Tax Authorities.Thus, the High Court clarified that the red entry/charge created by the Revenue Department on the property of the petitioner-company during the currency of the moratorium imposed by the NCLT, would be void in law.Benefit Of Section 4 Of Limitation Cannot Be Extended To Thirty Days Provided By Proviso To Section 34(3): Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: National Highway Authority of India v. Narayan DasCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 60While hearing a petition under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, the Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Bipin Chander Negi upheld the order passed by the district court, dismissing a Section 34 petition as barred by limitation. The court held that the benefit of Section 4 of the Limitation Act could only be extended to the prescribed period of limitation, which in the case of Section 34 is three months.Himachal Pradesh HC To Decide If 12% Free Power Supply To States By Hydro Power Projects Can Be Subjected To GST, Stays 1000+ Cr. Demand Against NHPCCase title: NHPC Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST and Ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 61The Himachal Pradesh High Court will decide whether free power supply of 12% to the States where distress is caused by hydro power projects, can be subjected to Service Tax or GST.Meanwhile, Division bench of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Satyen Vaidya has stayed the demand made by the Additional Commissioner of CGST Department on the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Private Limited.Himachal Pradesh HC Says Rule 86B Of CGST Rules Limiting Discharge Of Output Tax Liability Through ITC In Electronic Credit Ledger Appears To Be Ultra Vires HPGST Act But Leaves Issue OpenCase title: M/s A.M. Enterprises v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 62The Himachal Pradesh High Court observed that Rule 86B of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST/HPGST) Rules, 2017, which restricts use of Input Tax Credit (ITC) in the Electronic Credit Ledger for releasing Output tax, appears to be ultra vires the HP Goods and Services Tax Act 2017.Rule 86B stipulates that ITC in the Electronic Credit Ledger can be used to discharge 99% of output tax liability. 1% of the output tax liability is to be paid in cash.Negotiable Instruments Proceeding Under Section 138 Does Not Abate On Initiation Of Insolvency Proceeding: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Title: Tushar Sharma v. State Bank of IndiaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 63The High Court observed that both proceedings under section 138 and under the IBC could proceed simultaneously. The High Court further observed that the moratorium under section 14 of the IBC is...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Round-Up November 4 - November 10 2024

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags