Facts of the Case

Asha Alpana Enterprise and another filed WPA 22044 of 2023 before the Calcutta High Court against the State of West Bengal, seeking a direction that the respondent authorities bear the additional tax liability arising on government contracts — whether awarded in the pre-GST or post-GST regime — where the Schedule of Rates (SOR) and Bill of Quantities had not been updated to factor in applicable GST after its introduction on 1st July 2017. The petitioner also sought a direction to neutralise the unforeseen additional tax burden on contracts spanning the GST transition and to update the State SOR to replace the inapplicable West Bengal VAT reference with applicable GST.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the State was obligated to bear or reimburse the additional GST burden on government contracts awarded before the GST rollout without SOR revision.
  2. What relief, if any, the Court should grant in a writ petition raising a contractual/fiscal claim of this nature.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The State had not updated the Schedule of Rates or Bill of Quantities to reflect applicable GST when contracts were awarded across the pre-GST/post-GST transition.
  • This left contractors bearing an unforeseen additional tax burden not contemplated when bids were submitted.
  • The State should neutralise this burden and revise the SOR to reflect GST instead of the now-inapplicable VAT.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State's counsel participated in the hearing; the recorded order does not set out any specific rebuttal on the merits of the GST reimbursement claim, since the matter was disposed of on a procedural basis.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court did not decide whether the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the additional GST burden.
  • Instead, it disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Government of West Bengal, within four weeks.
  • The Additional Chief Secretary was directed to decide the representation within four months by a reasoned, speaking order after consulting other relevant departments and considering judgments of other High Courts relied upon by the petitioner.
  • No coercive action was to be taken against the petitioner pending the decision, provided the representation was filed within the stipulated time.

Important Clarification

Contractors facing a similar GST-transition burden on government contracts should note that this order does not establish an entitlement to reimbursement — it simply directs the government department to consider the claim on its merits through a reasoned representation process. Anyone relying on this order should follow up with an actual, well-documented representation rather than treating the order itself as a grant of relief.

Sections Involved

  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — background context for the GST transition referred to in the petition.
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction invoked.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of without a decision on merits; the petitioner was granted liberty to make a representation to the Finance Department, which must decide it by a reasoned order within four months.

Case Details

Court: High Court at Calcutta
Case No.: WPA 22044 of 2023
Date: 19.09.2023
Parties: Asha Alpana Enterprise & Anr. vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.