Chattisgarh High Court
Gg Associates vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 December, 2022
Author: P. Sam Koshy
Bench: P. Sam Koshy
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Writ Petition (T) No.283 of 2022
1. GG Associates A Partnership Firm Having Its Office At Mittal Niwas, H. No.
1, Kadambri Nagar, Dhamdha Road Durg Cg Through Its Power Of
Attorney Holder Mr Ayush Mittal Aged About 32 Years Son Of Ram Nowas
Resident Of Mittal Niwas, H. No. 1, Kadambri Nagar, Dhamdha Road,
Durg, District-Durg, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Under Secretary Water Resources
Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar,
District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godawari Basin Water Resources Department
Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Superintending Engineer Water Resources Department, Shivnath Circle,
District : Durg, Chhattisgarh.
4. Executive Engineer Water Resources Division Chhuikhadan, District :
Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Shri Sidharth Dubey, Advocate.
For State : Shri Ghanshyam Patel, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
16.12.2022
1. The grievance of the petitioner seems to be the additional tax liability that the petitioner has incurred towards the payment of GST to the respondents.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that the work order that was issued to the petitioner dated 25.11.2022, the GST payable at that point of time was 12 percent whereas, subsequently vide 18.07.2022 the rate has been thereafter enhanced from 12 percent to 18 percent and in the process the petitioner has incurred certain additional liability towards payment of GST. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the department has itself on 30.09.2022 has amended the terms and conditions of the contract particularly clause-2.17.1 whereby the said clause stands amended and it has been held that in the event of any new tax or levy or cess being imposed by statute or any deviation in the existing royalty/tax/levy/GST -2- after the date for the receipt of the tender including extensions, if any, shall be treated as new tax and the contractor there upon necessarily and properly paying such new taxes the Engineer in Charge shall reimburse the said amount of such new tax on submission of proof of such payment of tax by the contractor.
3. According to the petitioner, the said order dated 30.09.2022 also has a clause to the extent that in the even if there is a reduction in the tax rate, the contractor would also have to reimburse the said amount to the State Government. Therefore now that there is a increase in the tax liability, it would be the same principle that would be applicable upon the respondents also and they are duty bound to reimburse the petitioner to the extent of the additional tax liability suffered by him in the course of the enhancement of the rate of GST.
4. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein has meanwhile filed a detailed representation to the respondent authorities vide representation dated 06.12.2022 and the respondents are yet to take a decision on the same.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submits that as of now the writ petition may be disposed of directing the respondent authorities to take a decision on the representation that the petitioner has made in the light of the order issued by the Water Resources Department itself on 30.09.2022 in this regard wherein clause-2.17.1 stands amended.
6. The limited prayer is not opposed by the counsel for the State, however he submits that the representation would have to be decided strictly in accordance with the provisions of law and the contract governing the field.
7. Given the said fact, the writ petition as of now stands disposed of directing the respondent authorities to consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner on 06.12.2022 at the earliest preferably within a period of -3- 90 days. While deciding the representation, the respondent authorities shall take into consideration the order dated 30.09.2022 whereby the clause - 2.17.1 stood amended. In addition, the petitioner would also be at liberty to make a fresh representation along with supporting documents showing the proof of the additional tax liability incurred by the petitioner which would facilitate the respondents in taking a decision.
8. Subject to the representation being decided favorably, the respondents shall also take steps for reimbursing the amount forthwith.
9. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder