9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 140 - HC - GSTLevy of GST above the tender amount - whether the tender amount is inclusive of GST / Taxes or is only a Basic Amount - it is submitted that the petitioner was liable to pay not only the bid amount of Rs. 1,61,74,260/- but also liable to pay 18% GST over the same - HELD THAT - In order to check the correctness of the petitioner s claim that the bid amount was not being accepted as such and was auto corrected after calculating 18% GST, we filled Rs.1,61,74,260/- in column No.13 and the same was duly accepted and surprisingly it is this very amount of Rs.1,61,74,260/- which was then reflected in column No.53 which relates to the total amount with all taxes - it is evidently clear that there was no auto generation of the amount at the site after filling in the basic rate. On the other hand, it is absolutely clear that the amount as was entered at Sr. No. 13 was auto reflected at Sr. No.53. There is yet another reason for not accepting the plea of the petitioner as the official-respondents along with their reply have placed the price schedule of the other Company namely The Prince Trading Company , who too had participated and qualified the e-tendering process wherein the basic rate quoted by it was Rs.1,33,11,111/- and the same is duly reflected at Sr. Nos. 13 as also 53. There are no irregularity much less any illegality in the demand raised by the respondents of GST @ 18% on the tender amount of Rs.1,61,74,260/-, as offered by the petitioner - petition dismissed.
Issues involved:
Challenge to the demand for paying GST above the tender amount. Analysis: The case involved a petition challenging the demand of the respondents for paying GST above the tender amount of Rs.1,61,74,260. The respondent had floated a short-term e-tender for setting up temporary 'Mela' shops during the "International Minjar Fair, 2022". The petitioner filled the basic rate as Rs.1,37,00,000 during the tender process, but the site did not accept the amount until 18% GST was added, resulting in a total of Rs.1,61,74,260. The petitioner argued that since the total amount inclusive of taxes was the same as the basic rate, they should not be liable to pay any amount over Rs.1,61,74,260. The court examined the bid schedule appended with the petition, where the basic rate and the total amount with taxes were shown to be the same. The petitioner contended that the respondents should have accepted the bid amount without additional GST. However, the respondents argued that the petitioner was liable to pay both the bid amount and 18% GST. The court reviewed the tender document and found that the bid amount entered by the petitioner was auto-reflected in the total amount with taxes, indicating no auto-generation of amounts after adding GST. Moreover, the court compared the petitioner's case with another company that participated in the tender process, where the basic rate quoted was different but also reflected the same in the total amount with taxes. Based on the evidence and submissions, the court concluded that there was no irregularity or illegality in the demand for GST on the tender amount. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and each party was directed to bear their own costs. The pending application, if any, was also disposed of in the judgment.
|
