Chandra Sekhar Jena vs. State Of Odisha

Facts

The petitioner, a contractor, executed a works contract on July 15, 2017. The petitioner's grievance is that the Department of Rural Works is refusing to reimburse the differential tax amount arising from the transition from Value Added Tax (VAT) to Goods and Services Tax (GST) effective July 1, 2017. The petitioner claims the department is obligated to consider this reimbursement claim based on guidelines for works contracts under GST, issued by the Finance Department of the Government of Odisha via an office memorandum dated December 10, 2018. Despite a representation filed on January 15, 2020, no action was taken. The petitioner sought disposal of the current writ petition in terms of a previous identical writ petition.

Held

The Court noted that the learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties did not dispute the petitioner's submission that the present writ petition was identical to W.P.(C) No.23906 of 2020 and covered by the order passed therein. Consequently, the Court allowed the present writ petition in the same terms as the previous order. The petitioner was permitted to supplement their existing representation by filing a fresh, comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority within four weeks. The competent authority was directed to consider and dispose of this representation in light of the revised guidelines dated December 10, 2018, as expeditiously as possible, but no later than April 30, 2022. The petitioner was informed that they could challenge the authority's decision if aggrieved. No coercive action was to be taken against the petitioner until April 30, 2022. The Court reiterated that the writ petition was allowed in the stated terms.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Opposite Party-Department is obligated to consider the petitioner's claim for reimbursement of the differential tax amount arising from the change in tax regime from VAT to GST, in light of the guidelines relating to works contract under GST issued by the Finance Department, Government of Odisha vide Office Memorandum No.FIN-CTI-TAX-0045-2017/38535/F dated 10th December, 2018. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the department is obligated to consider the reimbursement claim based on the aforementioned guidelines. The petitioner further submitted that the present writ petition is identical to W.P.(C) No.23906 of 2020 and should be disposed of in terms of the order passed in that case. Revenue/State's Contention: The learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties did not dispute the petitioner's position that the matter is covered by the previous order.