Patna High Court Weekly Roundup: May 05 - 11, 2025

Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 46 To 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 51NOMINAL INDEXAvanish Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 46 CTS Industries Limited vs. Directorate General of GST Intelligence 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 47 Dr. Mamta Sinha vs. The State of Bihar & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 48 Siddartha Travels v. Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 49 Amit Kumar & Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 50 Deo Narayan Singh vs The Union Of India 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 51Orders/JudgementsShould Have Vacated Govt Quarter When He Ceased To Be MLA: Patna HC Rejects Politician's Plea Against Demand Of ₹20.98 Lakh Penal RentCase Title: Avanish Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors.LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 46The Patna High Court dismissed an appeal moved by politician and former Bihar MLA Avanish Kumar Singh who claimed occupancy over a government bungalow despite resignation, observing that the moment he ceased to be an MLA he ought to have vacated the government quarter. A division bench of Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice Alok Kumar Sinha held that the petitioner's continued occupation of Government Quarter despite the de-allotment of the quarter following his resignation was without authority. Once Input Tax Credit Is Wrongfully Availed Due To Fraud Or Suppression, State Officer Can Issue Notice Even Without Central Action: Patna HCCase Title: CTS Industries Limited vs. Directorate General of GST IntelligenceLL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 47The Patna High Court has upheld a tax assessment order passed by the State GST Authority, clarifying that once a Proper Officer determines that input tax credit has been wrongfully availed or utilized due to fraud or suppression of facts, they are empowered to issue a notice under Section 74(1) of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017. A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Justice Sourendra Pandey held, “According to sub-section (1), wherever it appears to the Proper Officer that there is any wrongful availment of input tax credit or where the input tax credit has been utilized by reason of fraud or any willful statement or suppression of facts to evade tax, he shall serve notice on the person chargeable with tax which has not been so paid or which has been so short paid or to whom the refund has erroneously been made or who has wrongly availed or utilized input tax credit, requiring him to show cause as to why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice along with the interest payable thereon under Section 50 and a penalty equivalent to the tax specified in the notice.”Patna High Court Quashes 22 Yrs Old Criminal Case Against Gynaecologist Accused Of Involvement In Kidney Removal During SurgeryCase Title: Dr. Mamta Sinha vs. The State of Bihar & Anr.LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 48The Patna High Court has quashed all criminal proceedings against a female gynaecologist, in a long-pending medical negligence case dating back to 2003 whereby a railway employee alleged that his right kidney had been unlawfully removed during a surgery conducted at a private nursing home. The petitioner, Dr. Mamta Sinha, was accused solely on the basis of her presence in the operation theatre during a procedure performed by her husband, Dr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, for the treatment of chyluria.Patna High Court Upholds ₹25 Lakh Service Tax Demand Against Travel Agency Which Failed To Disclose Transactions & Claimed Records Were Lost In FireCase Title: Siddartha Travels v. Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise & Ors.LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 49The Patna High Court has recently upheld a service tax demand of ₹25.25 lakh against a travel agency, dismissing its defence that crucial business records had been lost in a fire. The Division Bench comprising Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey observed, “this petitioner having surrendered his service tax registration had not disclosed the transactions in ST-3. The Taxing Authority were not aware of this, they were looking for cooperation on the part of the petitioner, they called for relevant information and records during investigation but the petitioner did not provide those information to the Taxing Authority. In such circumstance, if the Taxing Authority has taken a view that it is a case of suppression and the facts which have surfaced during investigation were not earlier known to them and they would not have come to know it if the investigation would not have taken place, cannot be found fault with.”Outsourcing In Govt Depts Must Comply With Labour Laws: Patna HC Upholds 2019 Memo Allowing Contractual Assistants To Remain In ServiceCase Title: Amit Kumar & Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 50The Patna High Court has directed District Magistrate of Purnea to post 22 contractual executive assistants, appointed under the Bihar Prashashanik Sudhar Mission (BPSM) whose services were stopped due to...

Patna High Court Weekly Roundup: May 05 - 11, 2025

Bhavya Singh

Tags