9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 022, W.P (T) No. 3993 of 2022, W.P (T) No. 3994 of 2022, W.P (T) No. 3995 of 2022, W.P (T) No. 3996 of 2022, W.P.(T) No. 3997 of 2022 M/s Sri Sai Krishna Constructions, Royal Infraconstru Limited, M/s Harvin Construction Pvt. Ltd, M/s Spica Projects and Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd, M/s Bhardwaj Construction Company (P) Ltd., M/s Sew Infrastructure Ltd, M/s Vijay Kant Pandey, M/s Pankaj Kumar Singh, M/s Sidhartha Construction, Larsen & Toubro Limited, NNB Engineers Private Limited, Tata Steel Utilities and Infrastructure Services Ltd. (known as Jamshedpur Utilities & Services Company Ltd.), M/s Singh Electricals and Constructions, Classic Engicon Pvt. Ltd Versus The State of Jharkhand, Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, The Principal Secretary, Water Resource Dept., Ranchi, The Engineer-in-chief, Water Resource Dept., Ranchi, The Chief Engineer, Water Resource Dept., Ranchi, The Superintending Engineer, Water Ways Circle, Gumla, The Executive Engineer, Water Ways Division, Gumla, The Secretary, Commercial Taxes Dept., Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, The Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Prev), Central and oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Goods and Services Tax regime on ongoing works contract w.e.f. 1st July 2017. Petitioners contend that works contract in their individual cases contained clauses for computation of tax under the VAT regime over the taxable value of the contracts. However, under the GST regime not only the rate of tax has been increased, but is leviable on the taxable value of the works contract as a whole. Petitioners have been compelled to pay the differential tax burden without proper reimbursement. No uniform guidelines have been framed by the State of Jharkhand in this regard. Petitioners contend that guidelines in this regard have been laid down by other State Governments such as the Government of Telangana, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Railways as well as other public sector undertakings. Various orders have also been passed by the different High Courts such as the High Court of Madras and the High Court of Orissa. Earlier a direction was passed by this Court in W.P.(T) No.5045 of 2018 in the case of M/s Bhardwaj Construction Company (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand upon the respondent State to take a decision on this issue. The decision taken by the Water Resources Department, Gove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subsisting contracts or contracts executed even after 01.07.2017 upon implementation of GST regime. The order dated 14.12.2021 refers to the SOP framed by the MoRTH through letter dated 19.12.2018 by which a mechanism was framed and also letter dated 14.07.2021 issued by the Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, 4. Government of Jharkhand bearing letter no. 1421. However, it appears that the problem lies in its implementation only. It also shows that different departments need to implement the SOP in uniform manner so that grievances of the petitioners concerning different departments are redressed on uniform principles. It appears that lack of coordination amongst different departments of the State may be one of the reasons for not giving concerted response to the order dated 14.12.2021. We therefore, feel that the matter be brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand so that the issue at hand may be addressed through a nodal department and guidelines for its implementation within a timeframe may be laid down. 3. Learned A.A.G-II Mr. Sachin Kumar and other State counsels are at a loss for not been able to file the affidavit in the respective writ petition pursuant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T payments of pending bills related to work orders issued during pre-GST period. S.O. No. 33 Dated 26 August, 2022-The matter relates to the Works Contract awarded by the State Government departments/ local authorities in the pre GST period and payments and execution of those Works Contract Services (partly or wholly) is to be made in the post GST period i.e. from 1.07.2017. The Goods and Services Tax (GST) has come into force w.e.f 1st July 2017 by subsuming various indirect taxes such as Central excise duty, Service tax VAT, CST, Entry tax, etc. Subsequent to the enactment of GST Act w.e.f. 01.07.2017, different work departments of State Government have sought clarifications on modalities of treatment of pending bills of different contractors where in the contract was awarded in pre- GST regime, i.e., VAT regime and the works has completed partly/wholly after the implementation of GST. Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court has directed the Government of Jharkhand to issue guidelines on this matter in its order dated 16-03-2021 in WP (T)-2108/2019. The main issue under consideration is for the payment of pending bills related to work order issued during pre GST period and suppl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to a fresh cause of action to be raised in an appropriate proceeding. It would also be open for the petitioners to lay a challenge to any of the clause of SOP if so aggrieved thereby. Since the claim of the petitioners have been pending for quite long on the implementation of GST regime since 01.07.2017, it would be in the fitness of things that the representation or claim of the individual petitioners be decided in an expeditious manner, preferably within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In some of the writ petitions, earlier a stand has been taken by the Respondents as to the correctness of the claim raised by the individual petitioners, the same will not come into the way of the Respondents in taking a fresh decision after application of the guidelines and terms framed under the fresh SOP dated 26.08.2022. 8. Let W.P (T) Nos. 989/2022 and 990/2022 be de-tagged from the instant batch of writ petitions and be listed separately after one week. 9. Rest of the writ petitions are disposed of. Needless to say, this Court has not made any comment on the case of the individual petitioners. All the pending I.A.s are closed. The typing error in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
