Delhi HC dismisses pleas challenging notification levying GST on online booking of auto rickshaw rides

0
WhatsApp Channel Join Now
Telegram Group Join Now
Instagram Join Now

The Delhi High Court has dismissed three petitions challenging the notification of Goods and Services Tax (GST) levied by the central government on online booking of autorickshaw rides by passengers through ride-sharing applications. A division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said in an order passed on Wednesday that we are of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to the relief sought in the writ petitions. Therefore, the present batch of writ petitions stand dismissed

The three petitions were filed by Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd, Progressive Auto Rickshaw Drivers Union and IBIBO Group Pvt Ltd along with Make My Trip (India) Pvt Ltd (collectively). Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd in its submission has said that the market is always price sensitive. If the final cost of services is high then customers may not opt to book auto rickshaw through it.

Apart from the financial impact on the petitioner Uber, the financial autonomy of the drivers will be completely at risk. There is a strong possibility that due to the effect of the impugned notifications, the general public would become reluctant to avail auto-rickshaw services such as those provided by the petitioner (Uber) provided by ECO. This would lead to loss of livelihood for the auto-rickshaw drivers providing their services through the ECOs created by the petitioner. The entire clause for termination affecting the livelihood of 2,40,000 registered driver partners of the petitioner may be unviable for the ECO. Petitioner Uber said it would also deprive them of the benefits provided by the ECO.

The Center opposed the petitions saying that ECOs are liable to pay tax on supplies made through them by other suppliers under a notification issued under section 9(5) of the 2017 Act. Hence, in cases where one is making one’s own supply. goods or services or both through its website, the provisions of sections 9(5) and 52 shall not apply. It was also argued on behalf of the respondents that levy of tax on transport services supplied through ECOs does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution as equality has to be maintained between equals. The whole concept of protective discrimination is based on this. There is no equivalence between transporters supplying services through ECOs and those supplying their services without the involvement of ECOs. Various players supplying services through ECO (‘Vendors’) benefit not only from the IT infrastructure and other resources of ECO but also from their organization as well as logistics capability and other resources. (ANI)

Kumud Sharma

https://diarytimes.com/

Continuing the achievement of the journey of effectiveness and credibility of more than 10 years in the career of journalism, as a woman journalist, I am Serving as the founder, promoter and editor of DiaryTimes with the trust and support of all. My credible coverage may not have given a big shape to the numbers, but my journey presents articles that make you aware of the exact and meaningful situations of Himachal’s politics, ground issues related to the public, business, tourism and the difficult geographical conditions of the state and financial awareness. DiaryTimes, full of the experience of my precise editorial expertise, is awakening the flame of credible journalism among all of you, so that the eternal flame of meaningful change can be lit in the life of the people of the state and the atrocities being committed against the people can be brought to the fore, I am motivated for that. If even a small change comes with the power of my journalism and the whole world becomes a witness to that issues, then I will consider myself fortunate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *