Allowed¶36

Sharanegoud Mali Patil v. the Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Jul 2025WP/103584/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court Dharwad Bench; WP No. 103584 of 2025 (GM-RES); Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur; GST refund; differential GST 8%; works contract cement concrete roads; APMC Gangavathi Main Market Yard; contractor; writ of mandamus; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; GST Act 2017; refund with 18% interest; Rs.15,99,868; follows WP No.104908/2023 (GM-RES) and WA No.14272/2021 (T-RES); six weeks compliance.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; writ of mandamus issued directing respondents to reimburse the differential GST amount of 8% on the total bill, i.e., Rs.15,99,868/-, with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of crediting the same to GST till realization; Respondent No.2 to refund within six weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. ¶36

Sharanegoud Mali Patil Vs the Government of Karnataka — GST and Indirect Tax | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents are liable to refund to the petitioner the differential GST amount of 8 percent on the total bill (2nd CC bill to 5th CC bill), i.e., Rs.15,99,868/-, along with 18% interest from the date of crediting the same to GST till realization.

¶18

Court's answer

Since a coordinate bench in identical circumstances had allowed refund of GST and the division bench upheld that refund, there is no serious dispute and this petition also deserves to be allowed.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to reimburse the differential GST amount of 8% on the total bill, i.e., Rs.15,99,868/-, along with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of crediting the same to the GST till realization.

¶38

Key takeaways

Respondent No.2 shall refund the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by a Class-I PWD contractor seeking mandamus for refund of the differential GST amount of 8% on total bills (2nd CC bill to 5th CC bill) of Rs.15,99,868/- with 18% interest, arising from a cement-concrete roadworks contract at the Main Market Yard of Gangavathi APMC. Noting that in identical circumstances a coordinate bench in Writ Petition No.104908/2023 (GM-RES) had allowed reimbursement of GST and the division bench in Writ Appeal No.14272/2021 (T-RES) upheld that refund, the court held there was no serious dispute, allowed the petition, issued a writ of mandamus directing reimbursement of Rs.15,99,868/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of crediting the same to the GST till realization, and directed Respondent No.2 to refund within six weeks.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9022 WP No. 103584 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 103584 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHARANEGOUD MALI PATIL, S/O. GURUPADA GOUDA MALIPATIL, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, CONTRACTOR, HAVING RESIDENCE/PLACE OF BUSINESS IN WARD NO.1, MAILAPUR ROAD, POST. MAILAPUR, TQ: GANGAVATHI, KARNATAKA.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. RAVIKIRAN P. PAWAR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI

¶14

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶15

THE CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARY, APMC GANGAVATHI TALUK, DISTRICT KOPPAL-583231.

¶16

(BY SRI. S.V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1; SRI. P.N. HATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR SUCH OTHER ORDER IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO REFUND THE DIFFERENTIAL GST AMOUNT OF 8 PERCENT ON TOTAL BILL (2^ND CC BILL TO 5^TH CC BILL) IE RS.15,99,868.00 (FIFTEEN LAKH NINETY NINE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED SIXTY EIGHT) DUE TO ME ALONG WITH THE 18% INTEREST ON THE SAID AMOUNT FROM THE DATE OF MY CREDITING THE SAME TO THE GST TILL ITS REALIZATION AT ANNEXURE-C AND ETC.

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9022 WP No. 103584 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶24

Petitioner is a senior Class-I PWD contractor having undertaken various kind of infrastructural work including executing works in the APMCs under the Department of Agricultural Marketing. He is having unblemished reputation and track of record as s senior contractor of good standing.

¶25

Petitioner was awarded the contract for providing of cement concrete to the roads at the Main Market Yard of Gangavathi APMC. The contract agreement was entered into with the Chairman and the Secretary of the APMC, Gangavati at the contract agreement price of Rs.2,80,23,991/-. This being the state of affairs, 101^st Constitutional Amendment the Parliament introduced Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017 under one nation one tax regime on 01.07.2017 GST laws were implemented, replacing a complex web of Central and

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9022 WP No. 103584 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

State Taxes. Petitioner registered himself as a ‘taxable person’ under the GST laws and has obtained GST registration number for its business and the effect of GST on works contract was that the tax rate was enhanced to 18% later concession given and taxed taxes at 12% from 22.08.2017 till 30.06.2022 and reverted to 10% from 01.07.2022. Petitioner is now seeking refund of differential tax to 18% from 4%, which the petitioner paid to GST Department.

¶29

In the identical circumstances, in an order passed in Writ Petition No.104908/2023 (GM-RES)¹ by a coordinate Bench of this Court, allowed the petition and directed to reimburse the GST amount, as per representation made by the petitioner therein by specifying time stipulation for the refund. The said order of refund of tax was taken up in Writ Appeal No.14272/2021(T-RES)² and the said refund of tax ordered was upheld by the division bench of this Court and

¶30

1 NC:2023:KHC-D:9630

¶31

2 NC:2025:KHC:4493-DB

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:9022 WP No. 103584 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

the appeal came to be rejected. Therefore, there is no serious dispute to the said challenge. Hence, this petition also deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass the following :

¶35

ORDER

¶36

(i) Petition is allowed.

¶37

(ii) Writ of mandamus is issued directing respondents to reimburse the differential GST amount of 8% on total bill i.e.,

¶38

Rs.15,99,868/- (Fifteen lakh ninety nine thousand eight hundred and sixty eight only) along with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of crediting same to the GST till its realization.

¶39

(iii) Respondent No.2 shall refund the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶40

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶41

CKK

Sharanegoud Mali Patil v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharanegoud Mali Patil v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Subramanya S/O Manjunath Hegde Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Suvarna W/O Balappa Bannikoppa Vs the Principal Chief Conservator Fo Forests

Balasaheb B Gaste S/O Bhimappa Gaste Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Baburao B Rane, Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Machindra S/O Nagappa Kamble Vs Sri Shravan S/O Nagappa Kamble

Ajith Bantanur Vs the State of Karnataka