Vriddhi Infratech INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. The Executive Engineer
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THUR AY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 28TH MAGHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 5328 OF 2022 PETITIONER: VRIDDHI INFRATECH INDIA PVT. LTD. PLOT NO.330/1, GROUND FLOOR, ROAD NO.25, BANJARA HILLS, HYDRABAD - 500034, TELENGANA, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT, VENKATA RATNA PRASAD Y. BY ADV M.S.AMAL DHARSAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (CPWD), OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IISER TVM PROJECT DIVISION -1, MELETHUMELE, VATTIYOORKAVU P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695013. 2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (CPWD), A WING, ROOM NO.101, NIRMAN BHAWAN, NEW DELHI - 110 011. OTHER PRESENT: ADV. MANU.S -ASGI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 5328 OF 2022 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. =========================== W.P.(C) No.5328 of 2022 ============================ Dated this the 17th day of February, 2022 JUDGMENT The petitioner is engaged in construction works as a contractor, and claims to have carried out several works for the Central Public Works Department (CPWD). There are ongoing works as well, carried on by the petitioner.
The grievance projected in this writ petition relates to reimbursement of taxes due to the petitioner under the goods and service tax. Petitioner alleges that based upon the General Conditions of Contract (GCC) of the CPWD and especially, Clause 38, petitioner is entitled for reimbursement of GST levied after receipt of tenders.
Sri.Amal Darsan, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that circulars issued by the CPWD for
WP(C) NO. 5328 OF 2022 3 reimbursement of compensation after imposition of GST, provided, a methodology to calculate the compensation for reimbursement. However, by an office memorandum/circular dated 29.09.2020, a variation was effected to the mode of calculation. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the methodology of calculation provided in the model calculation sheet for reimbursement of GST and submitted that crucial mistakes of far reaching effect have crept into the said model calculation sheet. According to the learned counsel, if the model calculation sheet is relied upon, great loss will occur to the contractors in general, including the petitioner. Pointing out the anomalies in the model calculation sheets attached to Ext.P5 circular, petitioner has filed a representation before the respondents, copies of which are produced as Ext.P7 and Ext.P8. 4. Having regard to the nature of anomalies pointed out by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that a serious consideration ought to be made by the competent amongst the
WP(C) NO. 5328 OF 2022 4 respondents to the anomalies pointed out by the petitioner. As apparently, there is a patent irregularity, which may require an earnest application of mind on the part of the respondents while considering the representation of the petitioner.
In the nature of the contentions raised by Shri.Amal Darshan and after hearing Sri.S.Manu, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing consideration of the representations dated 12.10.2021 and 09.12.2020 submitted by the petitioner to the 1st respondent in a time bound manner. Since the 2nd respondent is the competent authority to consider, the representations shall be forwarded by the 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent within two weeks of the receipt of a copy of this judgment.
In view of the above, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7 and Ext.P8 representations, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of
WP(C) NO. 5328 OF 2022 5 receipt of a copy this judgment. The petitioner shall also be granted an oppotunity of hearing, before a decision, as directed, is taken. Needless to mention, the 2nd respondent while taking a decision, shall consider the correctness, or otherwise, of the rough calculation sheet, produced as Ext.P6 in this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE ssa/
WP(C) NO. 5328 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5328/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF THE WORK ORDER DATED 10.08.2016. Exhibit P2OF THE TABULAR SHEET SHOWING DETAILS OF PAYMENTS RECEIVED ON THE WORKS UNDERTAKEN BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P3OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED 04.12.2017. Exhibit P4OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED 06.02.2020. Exhibit P5OF THE OM DATED 29.09.2020. Exhibit P6OF THE MODEL CALCULATION PINPOINTING THE ARITHMETICAL MISTAKE IN THE EXHIBIT P5 OM CALCULATION SHEET. Exhibit P7OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8OF THE LETTER DATED 09.12.2020 SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE GST COMPENSATION CLAIM.
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.