Chandra Sekhar Jena vs. State Of Odisha

Facts

The petitioner, a contractor, executed a works contract on December 20, 2016. His grievance is that the Department of Rural Works is not reimbursing 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 based on the guidelines for works contracts under GST, issued by the Government of Odisha's Finance Department via Office Memorandum No.FIN-CTI-TAX-0045-2017/38535/F dated December 10, 2018. Despite a representation filed on January 15, 2020, no action was taken. The petitioner submitted that this writ petition is identical to W.P.(C) No.23906 of 2020 and sought disposal in terms of the order passed in that case.

Held

The Court noted the agreed stand between the parties that the present writ petition is fully covered by the decision rendered in W.P.(C) No.23906 of 2020, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court on January 13, 2021. Consequently, the Court allowed the present writ petition in the same terms as the prior decision. 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 is 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 retains the right to challenge the authority's decision if aggrieved. No coercive action will be taken against the petitioner until April 30, 2022. The core principle applied is that where a matter is identical to a previously decided case and the parties agree, the same relief should be granted.

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 Department is obligated to consider the claim for reimbursement of the differential tax, citing the aforementioned Office Memorandum. The petitioner also argued 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 writ petition is covered by the decision in W.P.(C) No.23906 of 2020.