9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 1237 - HC - GSTReimbursement of GST payable by the Petitioner for improvement of roads - HELD THAT - The petitioner had filed the present writ petitions to direct the first Respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 24.11.2020 and also direct the first respondent to reimburse GST payable by the Petitioner for improvement of roads in Zone-9, Dn-109, 118, 119 and 123 (Package -13) and Zone -10, Dn -127, 129, 131 to 135 (Package 11), for the construction of Integrated Storm Water Drain in Padikuppam water shed of Cooum Basin (Package-18) and for the construction of Integrated Storm Water Drain in Manapakkam water shed of Adyar Basin (Package-34) awarded by the first respondent, along with applicable interest @ 18 percentage p.a. under Sec 50 of CGST Act 2017 to the Petitioner. The 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.11.2020, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, including the relevant Government orders after granting the petitioner reasonable opportunity within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off.
Issues:
The issues involved in this judgment are the reimbursement of GST payable by the Petitioner for various construction projects awarded by the first respondent, the applicability of GST on services provided by the Petitioner, and the liability of the first Respondent as the service recipient for the payment of GST. Reimbursement of GST: The Petitioner, engaged in construction activities, participated in a bid for road improvement projects in Chennai. The Petitioner was awarded these projects during the Service Tax regime and did not account for Service Tax liability due to an exemption. With the introduction of GST, the services provided by the Petitioner attracted 18% GST, later reduced to 12%. The Petitioner did not charge or pay GST based on the belief that the works were exempt. The second respondent identified GST liabilities for the projects undertaken by the Petitioner and demanded payment. Liability of First Respondent: The Petitioner requested reimbursement of the GST amount from the first Respondent, stating that as an indirect tax, the liability should be borne by the service recipient. The first Respondent neither reimbursed the GST nor responded to the Petitioner's request. The Petitioner filed writ petitions seeking reimbursement of GST along with interest, citing the difficulties faced due to the threat of recovery by the second respondent for the GST liability. Government Orders and Directions: Similar writ petitions in the past were disposed of with directions stating that the liability under the GST regime should be borne by the procuring entity, which in this case is the first Respondent. Government orders emphasized the need for clarity on the treatment of GST in contracts and directed procuring entities to make on-account payments to contractors. The first Respondent was directed to consider the Petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within four weeks, following relevant Government orders. Conclusion: The judgment directs the first Respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation for reimbursement of GST within four weeks, in accordance with the law and relevant Government orders. The writ petitions are disposed of with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
|
