Disposed

Varuns Associates v. Central Public Works Department

Delhi HC8 Jul 2026W.P.(C)/2472/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Electrical contractors of CPWD sought mandamus directing reimbursement of service tax on works executed from 01.07.2003 under inclusive-of-taxes tenders. The Court held the disputed liability raised a question of fact requiring evidence and noted an arbitration clause, disposing of both writ petitions with liberty to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed of with liberty to petitioners to avail appropriate remedy (arbitration) in accordance with law; no substantive relief granted.

Varuns Associates Vs Central Public Works Department — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~18 and 19

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 11340/2009 and CM APPL. 10930/2009 HAPPY ELECTRICALS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. S. S. Sastry, Mr. Naveen, Mr. Brijesh Tiwari and Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

¶6

(19)		Through:	Mr. CG Pan and Adv	.....Respondent Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, SC with Mr. Mukesh Kumar dey, Mr. Dashmesh Tripathi Mr. Swan Kumar Shukla, s.
+	W.P.(C) 2472/ VARUNS ASS	2010 and CM A OCIATES	PPL.	4937/2010 .....Petitioner
		Through:	Mr.	S. S. Sastry, Mr. Naveen,
			Mr.	Brijesh Tiwari and Mr.
		versus	Um	esh Kumar, Advs.

¶7

CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

¶8

	.....Res	pondent
Through:	Mr. Bhagvan Swarup	Shukla,
	CGSC with Mr. Mukesh	Kumar
	Pandey, Mr. Dashmesh	Tripathi
	and Mr. Swan Kumar	Shukla,
	Advs.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

¶11

¶12

O R D E R 08.07.2026

¶13

The Petitioners herein are an Electrical Contractor, who are stated to be working for Central Public Works Department (CPWD).

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 11:43:47

¶16

2. Through the present both Writ Petitions, the Petitioners pray for the following reliefs:-

¶17

“i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ thereby directing the Respondent to make the incidence of service tax on the Petitioner and other like contractors (service providers), reimbursable by the Respondent (service receivers) with effect from the date when the incidence thereof had commenced, i.e., with effect from 01-07-2003, in respect of works executed by the contractor against the tenders floated by the Respondent;

¶18

ii) Issue of a writ-in the nature of certiorari and/or any other appropriate nature thereby directing the Respondent to formulate guidelines for reimbursement of the service tax liability of the contractors (service providers), subject to furnishing of the proof of deposit of the service tax by the contractor to the Service Tax Department, without insisting on the payment of the service tax "on demand' as contained in the impugned Notification dated 28.01.2009.”

¶19

The Respondent has filed a Reply to the present Writ Petition contesting the liability. It is claimed by the Respondent that as per clause 38 of the CPWD Manual, 2007, the contract was awarded inclusive of all taxes. Hence, the Petitioner is not entitled to service tax w.e.f. 01.07.2003.

¶20

It has also been brought to the notice of the Court that on 28.01.2009, it went through an amendment and thenceforth, the service tax is separately payable. Moreover, as per the agreement, the dispute between the parties can be resolved only through Arbitration. 5. This Court has considered the parties’ submissions. Both the present Writ Petitions were filed in the year 2009 and 2010. The Petitioners claim payment of service tax from 01.07.2003. Moreover, there is a provision for resolution of dispute by way of arbitration. The Respondent is disputing the liability. In such circumstances, a question of fact is required to be adjudicated based on relevant evidence. Thus, the Petitioner, if so advised, may avail the appropriate

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 11:43:47

¶23

remedy in accordance with law.

¶24

Keeping in view the observations above, both the present Writ Petitions, along with the pending applications, are disposed of. 7. A photocopy of the Order passed today be kept in the connected matters.

¶25

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶26

SHAIL JAIN, J.

¶27

JULY 08, 2026 /sp/kb

¶28

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 11:43:47

Varuns Associates v. Central Public Works Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varuns Associates v. Central Public Works Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazir Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Anr.

Ajay Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Gian Chand & Ors.

Darshan Lal & Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Master Sorabh Rathor through His Guardian Smt Savitri Vs North Delhi Public School and Ors.

Sudhir Rana Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Parth Shokeen (Proprietor Parth Enterprises) Vs Sales Tax Officer Class Ii/Avato Ward 62 Zone 5 & Ors.

Rajendra Thakur & Anr. Vs Govt of NCT Delhi & Anr.

Madhav Aircon and Traders through Proprietor Mayank Sateja Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax & Anr.

Tilak Raj Nagpal Vs Superintendent,Anti-Evasion (GROUP-6) & Ors.

M/S Seher Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and Cgst, Delhi East

Jai Huanuman Sanitarywares Vs Commissioner of Dgst, Delhi, and Others & Anr.

M/S Planet Dewsoft Private Limited Vs Union of India and Anr.

Raj Kumar Gupta Prop Rajasthan Steel Corporation Vs Additional Commissioner Central Goods and Services Tax, & Anr.