M/S. B. H. Gangadharachar Contractor vs. State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER This captioned writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs; "(a) Issue a writ or such other order in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to Pay/Reimburse GST @ 12% for each of the works contract/composite supply executed by the petitioner at Annexure A to A7 series dated 20.10.2018, 20.10.2018, 20.12.2018, 20.12.2018, 05.12.2018, 05.11.2018, 05.11.2018, 05.12.2018 and 28.12.2018. (b) In the alternative, issue a write or such other order in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to consider the Representation of the petitioner dated 31.07.2023 and produced as Annexure- F. (c) Pass such other orders as may be deemed appropriate under the circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice." HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14429
The petitioner claims entitlement for payment of differential tax under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime in respect of payments made on or after 01.07.2017. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted a representation to respondent No.2 seeking reimbursement /payment of the differential tax in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.9721/2019. Alleging inaction on the part of the respondents in considering the said representation, the present writ petition is filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.588/2025, which in turn has relied upon the judgment rendered in W.P.No.25764/2023. 4. Referring to the aforesaid orders, learned counsel submits that in identical circumstances the Co-ordinate Bench has issued a direction to the authorities to reimburse the GST amount. It is therefore contended that a similar direction issued to the respondents to consider HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14429 the petitioner’s claim for reimbursement of differential GST would meet the ends of justice.
Per-contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner has only produced a statement indicating the alleged payment of GST as per Annexure–F. It is contended that in the absence of supporting documents evidencing actual payment/deposit of GST, the authorities are not in a position to examine the petitioner’s representation. On instructions, learned counsel submits that if the petitioner furnishes the necessary supporting documents evidencing payment of GST, the same would be examined and appropriate orders would be passed within 30 days from the date of receipt of such documents.
Recording the aforesaid submission made on behalf of respondent No.2, this Court proceeds to pass the following: HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14429 ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The petitioner shall furnish supporting documents evidencing payment of GST to respondent No.2 within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iii) Upon receipt of such documents, respondent No.2 shall examine the petitioner’s claim and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within 30 days thereafter. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.