Disposed¶24

Deepak Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Jan 2024WPC/82/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST refund on works contracts; excess GST due to rate hike from 12% to 18% w.e.f. 18.07.2022; Municipal Corporation Raipur; direction to decide contractor's representation dated 20.11.2023 within 90 days; parity with State departments PWD, Irrigation, Water Resources; writ petition disposed of; single judge Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi; WPC No. 82 of 2024; decision dated 09.01.2024.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2023 (Annexure P-1) expeditiously, preferably within an outer limit of 90 days from receipt of a copy of the order, taking into account similar decisions of the State Government in other departments. ¶24

Deepak Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents No. 2 & 3 ought to be directed to decide the petitioner's representation dated 20-11-2023 (Annexure P-1) seeking refund of excess GST paid on works contracts following the change in GST rate from 12% to 18% w.e.f. 18.07.2022.

¶18

Court's answer

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2023 (Annexure P-1) expeditiously, preferably within an outer limit of 90 days from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

In deciding the representation, the respondent authorities are expected to take into consideration similar decisions taken by the State Government in respect of contracts executed by contractors with other departments such as PWD, Irrigation Department and Water Resources Department.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WPC No. 82 of 2024, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur) — Civil contractor sought a direction to Municipal Corporation, Raipur authorities (Commissioner and Executive Engineer) to decide his representation dated 20-11-2023 for refund of excess GST payable due to the increase in GST rate on works contract from 12% to 18% w.e.f. 18.07.2022. Petitioner relied on refund decisions taken by the State Government in other departments (PWD, Water Resources, Irrigation). Counsel for respondents raised no objection to the limited prayer. Held: writ petition disposed of directing respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider the representation expeditiously, preferably within an outer limit of 90 days from receipt of the order's copy, while taking into consideration similar decisions taken by the State Government in respect of contracts executed with other departments.

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 82 of 2024

¶5

Deepak Pandey, S/o late C.P. Pandey, Aged About 57, Years, Civil Contractor A Class, Office at Shop No. 1, Pt. Lakhan Lal Mishra Complex, Kankali Para, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration & Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

The Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Advocate. For State/respondent No.1 : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, PL For Respondents No. 2 & 3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

09.01.2024

¶16

The limited relief that the petitioner seeks in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondent authorities to decide the representation dated 20-11-2023 (Annexure P-1) of the petitioner that the petitioner has made

¶17

¶18

for the refund of excess GST that was required to be paid by the petitioner on the change of GST rate on works contract from 12% to 18% w.e.f. 18.07.2022.

¶19

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the State Govt. themselves in other departments like; PWD, Water Resources, Irrigation etc., have already taken a decision for refund of the excess amount of GST that arose on account of deviation in the rate of GST payable. He further submits that there is no reason why the Municipal Corporation, Raipur also does not follow similar stand and consider the claim of petitioner for refund of excess GST. He submits that the petitioner has already made a detailed representation dated 20.11.2023 (Annexure P-1) to the respondent No.2 in this regard, but the same has not been decided yet.

¶20

Learned counsels for the respondents would submit that although representation filed by the petitioner has to be considered by the respondent No.2 & 3, however, considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, they have no objection to allow the prayer.

¶21

Given the submission made by the counsel for the parties, the writ petition as of now stands disposed of directing the respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider the representation dated 20.11.2023 (Annexure P-1) of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of

¶22

¶23

receipt of copy of this order. While taking a decision the respondent authorities is expected to take into consideration similar decisions that the State Government has taken in respect of the contracts executed by Contractors with other departments like; PWD, Irrigation Department, Water Resources Department etc.

¶24

With the aforesaid observations & directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶25

Sd/(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶26

Amit

Deepak Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hukumchand Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Divyanshu Trading Vs Union of India

Chakroram Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vipin Kumar Singh Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Rajeev Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajeev Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh