Facts of the Case

The Petitioner, M/s Ravi Shankar Tripathi, a Class-A civil contractor proprietorship based in Bilaspur, executed works contracts for the Raipur Development Authority. Following the increase in the GST rate applicable to works contracts from 12% to 18% with effect from 18.07.2022, the Petitioner was required to pay GST at the enhanced rate on its contract receipts. The Petitioner submitted a representation dated 13.10.2023 to the Raipur Development Authority claiming refund of the excess GST so paid, pointing out that other State Government departments such as the PWD, Water Resources and Irrigation Departments had already decided to refund similar excess GST amounts to their contractors on account of the same rate change. As the representation remained undecided, the Petitioner approached the Chhattisgarh High Court under Article 226 seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to decide it.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Raipur Development Authority was obliged to decide the Petitioner's pending representation seeking refund of excess GST arising from the increase in the GST rate on works contracts from 12% to 18%.
  2. Whether the Authority ought to follow the approach already adopted by other State Government departments in refunding similar excess GST amounts to their contractors.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The State Government, through other departments such as PWD, Water Resources and Irrigation, had already decided to refund the excess GST arising from the rate change on works contracts, and there was no reason for the Raipur Development Authority to adopt a different stand.
  • The Petitioner had already submitted a detailed representation dated 13.10.2023 to the Authority, which remained undecided.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Counsel for the State submitted that while the representation had to be considered by the respondent authorities, she had no objection to the limited prayer made by the Petitioner — namely, a direction that the representation be considered.

Court Order/Findings

  • Given the limited relief sought and the State's no-objection, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent authorities to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 13.10.2023 at the earliest, preferably within an outer limit of 90 days from receipt of a copy of the order.
  • While deciding the representation, the respondent authorities were directed to take into consideration similar decisions already taken by the State Government in respect of contracts executed with other departments such as PWD, Irrigation and Water Resources.
  • The petition was disposed of in these terms without any finding on the Petitioner's entitlement to the refund itself.

Important Clarification

  • The Court did not itself determine whether the Petitioner was entitled to a refund of the excess GST arising from the rate change on works contracts; it directed the authority to decide that question, having regard to consistency with the State's own practice for similarly placed contractors under other departments.
  • Consistency across government departments in refunding rate-differential GST to contractors on public works contracts is a factor the deciding authority is expected to weigh, even though it does not by itself create a binding entitlement.

Sections Involved

  • GST rate notification effecting the increase in the rate applicable to works contracts from 12% to 18% with effect from 18.07.2022 under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 — invoked for the writ remedy directing consideration of the representation.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions and no finding on merits, in part in favour of the Assessee. The Petitioner secured a time-bound direction for consideration of its refund claim, without an adjudication on entitlement.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur
  • Case No.: WPC No. 5090 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
  • Decision Date: 21-12-2023
  • Disposal Nature: Disposed of (respondents directed to decide representation for refund of excess GST)

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (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.