Facts of the Case
The petitioner, M/s. Bhanjadeo Constructions,
challenged the action of the State Government authorities for not reimbursing
the differential tax burden that arose due to the transition from the VAT
regime to the GST regime with effect from 1 July 2017. The petitioner
contended that the works contract had been awarded prior to the implementation
of GST, but execution and payments continued after GST came into force,
resulting in an additional tax liability which was not contemplated at the time
of entering into the contract.
Issues Involved
- Whether a contractor executing a works contract awarded prior to
the introduction of GST is entitled to reimbursement of the additional GST
burden incurred after 1 July 2017.
- Whether the State authorities are required to consider the
contractor's claim in accordance with the revised Government guidelines
issued for transition from VAT to GST.
Petitioner's Arguments
- The contract was entered into during the VAT regime when GST was
not applicable.
- Due to the implementation of GST, the petitioner became liable to
pay additional tax that was not envisaged while submitting the bid.
- The authorities failed to reimburse the differential tax amount
despite the issuance of revised Government guidelines dealing with such
transitional works contracts.
- The petitioner sought appropriate directions for reimbursement of
the excess tax liability arising solely because of the change in the tax
regime.
Respondent's Arguments
- The State Government informed the Court that revised guidelines had
already been issued through the Finance Department Office Memorandum dated
10 December 2018, superseding the earlier guidelines issued on 7
December 2017.
- The revised guidelines prescribe the methodology for determining
the GST-inclusive value of works executed after 1 July 2017.
- The Government submitted that claims of contractors should be
examined in accordance with these revised guidelines.
Court Order / Findings
The Orissa High Court observed that the controversy
was already covered by its earlier decision in an identical matter.
The Court directed the petitioner to submit a
comprehensive representation before the competent authority within four weeks.
The competent authority was directed to consider
and dispose of the representation in accordance with the revised Government
guidelines dated 10 December 2018, preferably within three months.
The Court further directed that no coercive
action shall be taken against the petitioner until the competent authority
decides the representation. If the petitioner remains aggrieved by the
decision, liberty was granted to challenge the same before the appropriate
forum.
Important Clarification
- Contractors executing works contracts awarded before 1 July 2017
but executed wholly or partly after the introduction of GST may seek
reimbursement of the additional GST burden in accordance with the revised
Government guidelines.
- The revised guidelines provide a mechanism for recalculating the
balance work value on a GST-exclusive basis and thereafter adding the
applicable GST.
- Where the revised GST-inclusive value exceeds the original
agreement value, the contractor is entitled to reimbursement of the excess
amount.
- The competent authority must examine each claim individually in
accordance with the prescribed procedure.
Related Case Law
- M/s. Bhanjadeo Constructions vs State of Odisha & Others, W.P.(C) No. 38502 of 2021 (Orissa High Court)
- W.P.(C) No. 38490 of 2021 (Identical matter relied upon by the Court)
Link to Download the Order https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1784531723_1014compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment