Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
M/S. Msa Construction Private Limited & ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Revenue on 3 September, 2025
15
03.09.2025
sb
Ct.5.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 19109 of 2025
M/s. MSA Construction Private Limited & Anr.
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner of Revenue,
WBGST, Bally & Salkia Charge & Ors.
Mr. Ankit Kanodia
Ms. Megha Agarwal
Mr. Piyush Khaitan
Ms. Tulika Roy
... For the petitioners.
Mr. A. Roy, Ld GP
Mr. Tanoy Charkaborty
Mr. Saptak Sanyal
... For the State.
Mr. Arnab Chakraborty
Ms. Pragya Bhowmik
Ms. Rini Mondal
... For the respondent no.5.
1. Challenging the demand raised in Form GST APL- 04 dated 21st January, 2025, arising out of an order passed under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") dated 24th February, 2024, the instant writ petition has been filed.
2. The petitioners claim that the respondent no.5 which is a Government of West Bengal enterprise had been awarded contract for re-sectioning of the river "Ichamati" for better drainage, flood protection and agricultural benefit and separate contract for resuscitation of short cut diversion channel from Buxi to Thalia. The contracts were awarded by the irrigation and waterways department of the Government of West Bengal. 2
WPA 19109 of 2025
3. It is the petitioners' case that the petitioners have been sub-contracted the job as an implementing associate on revenue sharing basis. According to Mr. Kanodia, learned advocate representing the petitioners the works are in relation to implementation of a scheme for economic development and social justice as are entrusted to Panchayat under Article 243G of the Constitution of India as per the list detailed in the Eleventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. By placing reliance on the exemption notification no.12 of 2017-Central Tax (Rate), issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue dated 28th June, 2017, he would submit that the subject matter of contracts which are identified under serial nos. 3 and 3A, are exempted insofar as intra-state supplies of the descriptions specified in column 3 of the aforesaid notification is concerned. According to him, the aforesaid aspect has not been considered either by the proper officer or by the appellate authority, though the issues raised are covered by the unreported judgment delivered by this Court in the case of M/s Road and Roof Projects v. Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, Director of Revenue Intelligence and Enforcement & Ors., in WPA 3997 of 2025.
4. Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate appears on behalf of the State GST authorities and Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate appears on behalf of the respondent no.5. 3
WPA 19109 of 2025
5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties I find that both the proper officer and the appellate authority have proceeded to deny the benefit of the aforesaid exemption notification. Having considered the submissions and the findings returned by both the proper officer, the appellate authority and the case made out, I am of the view that the writ petition should be heard.
6. Since, the petitioners have been able to make out a prima facie case, subject to the petitioners' depositing 10 per cent of the amount of tax in dispute in addition to the amount already deposited under Section 107(6) of the said Act within a period of eight weeks from date, the demand raised in Form GST APL-04 dated 21st January, 2025 shall remain stayed till the disposal of the writ petition or until further order whichever is earlier.
7. Since, the advocates for the parties would submit that there is no scope for improving the case by way of affidavits and the hearing can be taken up on the basis of the materials already on record, I am of the view that this matter should be placed under the heading "Motion" in the Combined Monthly List of November, 2025 and can be disposed of accordingly.
8. The parties shall, however, be at liberty to rely on additional documents, provided the copies thereof are made over to the learned advocates representing the respective parties in advance.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)