Sri T Sanjaya vs. The Chief Engineer And Panchayath Raj And Engineering Department

Original PDF →
WP/22642/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01047066202404 April 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR9 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. MUKKANNAPPA S.B., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT.JYOTHI M MARADI, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3, AND R-5; SRI.HEMAKUMAR K., AGA FOR R-6; R-4 AND R-7 - SERVED, BUT UNREPRESENTED

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14529 WP No. 22642 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 22642 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. T. SANJAYA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O T.R. THIPPESWAMY, 'LAKSHMI NILAYA', VALMIKI NAGARA, CHALLAKERE TOWN, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MUKKANNAPPA S.B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER AND PANCHAYATH RAJ AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ AND ENGINEERING CIRCLE, DAVANGERE - 577 001. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ AND ENGINEERING DIVISION, CHITRADURGA - 577 501. Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14529 WP No. 22642 of 2024 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KARNATAKA TANDA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NO.6, GPR TOWER, 1ST FLOOR, PARK ROAD, TUSKAR TOWN, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 051. 5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYATH, CHALLAKERE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501. 6. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (AUDIT), CHALLAKERE, NRR ARCADE BUILDING, UJJIVAN BANK UPSTAIRS, BELLARY ROAD, CHALLAKERE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501. 7. THE MANAGER, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., CHALLAKERE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.JYOTHI M MARADI, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3, AND R-5; SRI.HEMAKUMAR K., AGA FOR R-6; R-4 AND R-7 - SERVED, BUT UNREPRESENTED) *** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 TO CONSIDER THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION DATED - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14529 WP No. 22642 of 2024 01.04.2024 AT ANNEXURE-J, J1, J2 AND J3 AND AS WELL AS THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION DATED 10.06.2024 AT ANNEXURE-L TO THE WRIT PETITION REGARDING PAYMENT OF DIFFERENTIAL GST TAX FOR CONTRACT WORKS EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD INDICATED IN THE REPRESENTATION BY GIVING TIME BOUND DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5, UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ISSUE ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR ORDERS OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEMS FIT TO GRANT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs. "a)ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents 3 to 5 to consider the written representation dated 01.04.2024 at Annexure-J, J1, J2 and J3 and as well as the written representation dated 10.06.2024 at annexure-L to the writ petition regarding payment of differential GST Tax for contract works executed by the petitioner for the period indicated in the representation by giving time bound direction to the respondents 3 to 5, under the facts and circumstances of the case; and b) ISSUE any other appropriate writ, order or orders or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice." NC: 2025:KHC:14529

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite submission of representations dated 01.04.2024/03/04/2024 at Annexures J, J1, J2, J3 as well State of Karnataka - W.P.No.9721/2019 and connected cases dated 11.04.2023, wherein it is held as under:

"

20.

In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petitions are hereby disposed of. (ii) The Respondents-State and other Govt agencies /Respondents who have entered into works contract NC: 2025:KHC:14529 with the Petitioners are issued the following directions / guidelines:- (a) Calculate the works executed pre- GST (prior to 01.07.2017) under KVAT regime and payments received by the Petitioners. (b) The payments received by the Petitioners pre-GST for such of the works executed before 01.07.2017 are to be assessed under KVAT tax regime – either under COT or VAT scheme as applicable. (c) Calculate the balance works to be completed or completed after 01.07.2017, in the original contract. (d) Derive the rate of materials, KVAT items required or used to complete the balance works. (e) Deduct the "KVAT" amount from those materials and the service tax, if applicable. (f) Add the applicable "GST" on those items. (g) Input Credit on the materials is to be arrived at and be set off as against the output GST, for those assessed under regular VAT. (h) Further, the “tax difference” should be calculated on such balance works executed or to be executed after 01.07.2017 separately. (i) Based on the result obtained on calculation of the tax difference on the contract value, concerned department/ authority has to decide whether agreement needs to be changed or not. (j) A supplementary agreement may be signed with the Petitioners for the revised GST-inclusive work value for the Balance Work completed or to be completed as determined above and in case the revised NC: 2025:KHC:14529 GST-inclusive work value for the Balance Work, completed or to be completed after 01.07.2017, is more than the original agreement work value, the Petitioners are to be paid /reimbursed, as the case may be, the differential tax amount by the concerned employer; so also, in case payments for works completed pre-GST are made post- GST, the concerned employer has to pay or reimburse, as the case may be, the differential tax amount, to the Petitioners. (iii) Petitioners are directed to submit comprehensive representations to the respective employers/Respondents within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, irrespective of whether they have completed the works pre-GST or post-GST or payments were received or yet to be received post-GST. (iv) If such representations are submitted, the respective employers/Respondents are directed to consider and dispose of the same in the light of the aforesaid directions / guidelines as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of 8 weeks from the date of submission of the representations. (v) In view of the interim orders passed by this Court in the present petitions, such of the petitioners who had not filed their GST returns during the period after 01.07.2017 are permitted to file their returns / amended returns, pursuant to the calculation of the differential tax as per procedure NC: 2025:KHC:14529 above under GST regime, without insisting on interest or penalty or limitation. (vi) The GST authorities are also directed not to take precipitative action against the Petitioners for a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (vii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners to challenge any order / decision passed / taken by the respondents or the authorities, subsequent to this order and also take recourse to such remedies as available in law."

4.

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of another - W.P.No.104908/2023 dated 29.08.2023 followed the aforesaid order and allowed the petition. The Co-ordinate Bench has held as follows:

"

5.

It is not in dispute that the entire tender process and allocation of work by respondent/Department is post coming into force of Goods and Services Tax. If petitioner, who is a registered Civil Contractor has completed the tender work, respondent/Department being a service recipient is under bounden duty to reimburse GST amount of Rs.2,16,51,903/- in terms of Section 13 of NC: 2025:KHC:14529 The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It is also not in dispute that petitioner, who is a class-I contractor having rendered service, is under mandatory duty to pay GST amount to the department. Equally respondent/Department is under bounden duty to reimburse the GST amount. It is borne out from the records that since necessary payment at the petitioner's end the applicable GST being statutory requirement, the respondent/ Department ought to have reimbursed 12% GST amount on the total work done by petitioner. Since, there is total inaction on the part of respondent/Department, this is a fit case where mandamus needs to be issued. For the reasons stated supra, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) The respondent is hereby directed to reimburse GST amount as indicated in the representation dated 15.04.2023 vide Annexure-E. iii) The respondent/Department shall reimburse the said amount within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” NC: 2025:KHC:14529

5.

In the light of the issue having been answered by this Court as well as a co-ordinate Bench of this Court (supra), the petition deserves to be allowed.

6.

For the aforesaid reasons, the following: - W.P.No.9721/2019 and connected cases dated 11.04.2023. ii. The concerned respondents are hereby directed to reimburse GST amount as indicated in the representations at Annexures – J, J1, J2, J3 and Annexure L back to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

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.