T.I.Raju vs. The Managing Director, Kerala Water Authority
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL WEDNE AY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 1ST ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.9260 OF 2020(F) PETITIONER: T.I.RAJU AGED 72 YEARS S/O.LATE T.E.ITHAPIRI, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR THURUTHUMMEL HOUSE, KUSUMAGIRI.P.O, KOCHI-30 BY ADVS. SMT.TESSY JOSE SRI.ELDHO PAUL RESPONDENTS: 1 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033 2 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM-676505 3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY PH DIVISION, SUKAPURAM.P.O, EDAPPAL-679576 4 THE FINANCE MANAGER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA WATER AUTHRITY, JALABHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033 SC - SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.9260 OF 2020(F) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 23rd day of September 2020 The petitioner through instant writ petition has sought indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent Kerala Water Authority to refund the GST amount paid by the petitioner.
In support of the aforementioned prayer it is averred that the petitioner quoted a tender for the work of “UWSS” Tirur- Package II, Replacement of clear gravity main to Muthur and Thalakadathur sumps, laying distribution in Tirur-Thalkadathur road and Agreement No.SE/PHC/MPM/2/2016-17 was entered in to between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent (Ext.P1) on 03.06.2016. The petitioner submitted that the 2nd part bill for the above work which has been paid in the month of March 2018. However, the agreement was executed before the implementation of the GST and the work was executed only after the implementation of GST. During this period, there was no permission for cutting of the road from the Public Works Department. In this background neither VAT nor GST was
WP(C).No.9260 OF 2020(F) 3 deducted from the said bills. The petitioner filed GST return by remitting 12% of the gross amount of the GST in time. But on 19.02.2019 while closing the third part bill, the department deducted a sum of Rs.1,77,500/- as arrears of VAT, which according to the petitioner is not justified.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the GST was implemented with effect from 01.07.2017. The petitioner was forced to pay 12% as additional tax. But none of the conditions contain any provision for payment of GST. In this regard, a circular bearing No.GST/002/17 dated 10.08.2017 (Ext.P2) was issued wherein the first respondent agreed to reimburse the amount additionally paid by the petitioner including similarly situated persons and in this regard, submitted a representation Ext.P3 dated 11.03.2020 to the respondents 1 to 3, but no action has been taken so far.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits, detailed counter is required to be filed as petitioner would not be entitled to refund of GST owing to the fact that the agreement was entered into before the introduction of GST regime, but would not be averse in taking a call in deciding the representation by taking
WP(C).No.9260 OF 2020(F) 4 all the grounds in contemplated reply. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, regarding the entitlement of GST refund owing to the fact that the agreement was executed in 2016, I am of the view that in the fitness of things, let respondents 1 to 3 consider the representation Ext.P3 taking into account the circular, ibid, which the petitioner is attempted to rely upon in support of the claim. In order to decide the aforementioned representation, the petitioner will be also afforded an opportunity of hearing, and at liberty to rely on any other provisions other than the circular referred above. Let this exercise is undertaken within a period of two months. This writ petitions will stand disposed of. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE nak
WP(C).No.9260 OF 2020(F) 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE AGREEMENT NO.SE/PHC/MPM/2/2016-17 DATED 3.6.2016 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2OF THE CIRCULAR NO.GST/002/17 DATED 10.08.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3LATEST REPRESENTATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 DT.11.3.2020 EXHIBIT P4OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS, DT.12.3.2020 ISSUED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY //// P.A TO JUDGE
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.