M/S Saanvipriya Buildtech Private Limited vs. Chief Secretary
Original PDF →Facts
These two writ petitions were filed by M/s Saanvipriya Buildtech Private Limited, a contractor, against various government departments and officials in Karnataka. In WP No. 20224/2024, the petitioner sought a direction to Respondent No. 2 (Taluk Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Ltd) to release GST paid on an invoice for completed work under Work Order No. TCARDB/CBP/410/18-19 dated 27.02.2019. In WP No. 20211/2024, the petitioner sought directions to Respondents 1 and 2 (Chief Secretary and Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited) to acknowledge that the work contract was exclusive of GST and that the consequential escalation of GST rate from 12% to 18% should be borne by Respondent No. 2. The petitioner also sought a direction to Respondent No. 3 (Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes) to acknowledge that GST should be levied at 12% and not 18% on work completed prior to 01.01.2022, and to prohibit further adjudication proceedings.
Held
The Court noted that it was an undisputed fact that the representations/letters/reminders submitted by the petitioner to Respondent No. 2 in both writ petitions had not been considered by Respondent No. 2. Under these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the rival contentions, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to dispose of the petitions. The Court directed Respondent No. 2 to consider and take an appropriate decision and pass orders on the petitioner's representations within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Liberty was also reserved for the petitioner to submit additional representations, which would be considered by Respondent No. 2, who was directed to provide a sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. No specific finding was given on the GST rate applicability or liability for escalation.
Key Issues
1. Whether Respondent No. 2 in WP No. 20224/2024 is liable to release the GST paid by the petitioner on the completed work under Work Order No. TCARDB/CBP/410/18-19, and to acknowledge this liability? 2. Whether Respondent No. 2 in WP No. 20211/2024 is liable to acknowledge that the work contract is exclusive of GST and to bear the consequential escalation of the GST rate from 12% to 18%? 3. Whether Respondent No. 3 in WP No. 20211/2024 should acknowledge that GST is to be levied at 12% and not 18% on work contracts completed prior to 01.01.2022, and whether further adjudication proceedings should be prohibited? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the GST paid on invoices for completed work should be released by Respondent No. 2 in WP 20224/2024. In WP 20211/2024, the petitioner argued that the work contracts were exclusive of GST and that any increase in the GST rate should be borne by Respondent No. 2. They also argued that the GST rate should be 12% and not 18% for work completed before January 1, 2022, and sought to prohibit further adjudication proceedings by Respondent No. 3. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state respondents.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER BEARING NO. TCARDB/CBP/410/18-19 DTD 27.02.2019 (ANNEXURE-A2) ISSUED BY THE R-2 AND (ANNX-C) AND ETC.,
IN WP NO. 20211/2024 BETWEEN: M/S SAANVIPRIYA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED KNNL CATEGORY-I CONTRACTOR KANAKA NAGARA NEAR WATER TANKER HOSAKOTE TOWN BENGALURU - 562 114 EMAIL: INFOR@SAANVIPRIYA.COM GSTIN: 29AAZCS0135N1ZK, REPRESENTED BY ARJUN MAHALINGAPPA MANAGING DIRECTOR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS SON OF MAHALINGAPPA …PETITIONER (BY SMT. JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE AND SRI. RAJEEV CHANNAPPA NULVI, ADVOCATE) AND:
CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001
KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LIMITED-02 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DANDAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT DIVISION, SHIKARIPURA, 4TH FLOOR NC: 2025:KHC:15709 COFFEE BOARD BUILDING NO.DR.B R AMBEDKARVEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-5.2, DGSTO-5, 5TH FLOOR, B BLOCK VTK-2, NEAR GAMES VILLAGE RAJENDRA NAGAR KORAMANAGLA BENGALURU - 560 047 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. JYOTI .M. MARADI, HCGP FOR R1 & R3. SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R-1 TO R-2 TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE WORK CONTRACT IS EXCLUSIVE OF GST RATE AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS OF ESCALATED RATE FROM 12 PERCENT TO 18 PERCENT HAS TO BE BORNE BY R-2 (ANNX-A TO C1) AND ETC.,
THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER
In these petitions, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:
Writ petition No.20224 of 2024: "WHEREFORE, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:- (a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No.2 to release the GST pald on the raised invoice on completed work referring the work Order No.TCARDB/CBP/410/18-19 dated bearing 27.02.2019 NC: 2025:KHC:15709 (ANNEXURE-'A2') Issued by Respondent No.2 and (ANNEXURE-'C'); (b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No.2 to acknowledge the liability to release the GST paid on the raised invoices of the completed work with reference to the said work Order bearing No.TCARDB/CBP/410/18-19 dated 27.02.2019 (ANNEXURE-'A2') Respondent No.2 and (ANNEXURE- 'C');. issued by (c) To pass any such other Writ, Order or Direction as this Hon'ble court might deem fit to be issued in the fact and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
Writ Petition No.20211 of 2024:
"WHEREFORE, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:- (a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.2 to acknowledge that the work contract is exclusive of GST rate and the consequential proceeding of escalated rate from 12% to 18% has Agreement No 103/2020-21, NO 104/2020-21, No 46/2020-21. dtd 23.10.2020, 02.11.2020 and 13.08.2020 to be borne by Respondent no.2, (ANNEXURE- A,B,C); vide and 1308 seso Work Order bearing No.EE:KNNL:DRP:SKP: WORK ORDER:/2020-21/1434 dated 23.10.2020, vide Work Order bearing NC: 2025:KHC:15709 No.EE:KNNL:DRP:SKP:WORK 02.11.2020 and vide No.EE:KNNL: DRP:SKP: WORK ORDER:/2020-21/1450 Work dated Order bearing ORDER:/2020-21/826 dated 13.08.2020 passed by Respondent No.2 (ANNEXURES - A1, B1 & C1 respectively); (b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No.2 to release the difference of GST payment from 12% to 18% to the Petitioner at the earliest (ANNEXURE-'F to F2'); (c) Issue of writ of Mandamus or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 to acknowledge that the GST is to be levied @12% but not @18% on the said work contracts as the work completed prior to 01.01.2022; (d) Issue a Writ of Prohibition or a direction in the nature of Writ of Prohibition, directing the Respondent No.3, not to initiate further proceeding in issuance of the adjudication order bearing ref No. DCCT(Audit) 5.2/DGSTO.5/GSTADT(21-22)/Order /2023-24 from the Commercial Tax Department followed by an order dated 15.09.2023(ANNEXURE-'D'); (e) To pass any such other Writ, Order or Direction as this Hon'ble court might deem fit to be issued in the fact and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, it is undisputed fact on NC: 2025:KHC:15709 the matter on record that the representation/letter/reminder at Annexures-D, D1, D2, D3 and D4 dated 10.04.2021, 24.05.2023, 25.05.2023, 05.07.2023 and 21.07.2023 respectively in Writ Petition No.20224 of 2024 and the representation/letter/reminder at Annexures-E, E1, E2, E3 and E4 dated 26.06.2023, 04.01.2024, 25.01.2024 respectively in Writ Petition No.20211 of 2024 addressed by the petitioner to respondent No.2 have not been considered by them even till today.
Under these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on merits/de-merits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to disposed off these petitions directing respondent No.2 to consider and take appropriate decision and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation at Annexures- D to D4 and Annexures-E to E4 respectively within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Liberty is also reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional representations, documents etc., which shall be considered by respondent No.2 who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. NC: 2025:KHC:15709 Subject to the aforesaid direction, the petitions stand disposed off. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
*bgn/- CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37
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.