Bijan Kumar Parida vs. State Of Odisha
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the action and decision of the opposite parties regarding the imposition of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on contracts where estimates were prepared under the previous VAT law. The petitioner sought restitution of GST benefits with interest and a direction to prepare a fresh schedule of rates considering price changes. The petitioner had previously filed a writ petition (W.P.(C) No. 2819 of 2020) where this Court, by an order dated 3rd February 2020, directed the opposite parties to decide the petitioner's representation dated 28th December 2019, keeping in view a guideline dated 10th December 2018. This earlier order was not challenged by the petitioner.
Held
The Court held that the Petitioner cannot be permitted at this stage to question the administrative decision/guideline dated 10th December 2018. This is because the Petitioner had previously filed a writ petition (W.P.(C) No. 2819 of 2020) where this Court, by an order dated 3rd February 2020, directed the Opposite Parties to decide the Petitioner's representation dated 28th December 2019, taking into account the said guideline. Since the Petitioner did not challenge this earlier order, they are precluded from raising the same issue again. The Court found no grounds to entertain the present writ petition under these circumstances. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner can, at this stage, question the administrative decision/guideline dated 10th December 2018, given the prior order of this Court dated 3rd February 2020 in W.P.(C) No. 2819 of 2020, which directed the Opposite Parties to decide the Petitioner's representation considering the said guideline, and which was not challenged by the Petitioner? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that the opposite parties' actions and decisions were illegal, unconstitutional, and violative of their legal rights by imposing GST on post-enactment contracts where estimates were prepared under VAT law. They sought restitution of GST benefits with interest and a direction to prepare a fresh schedule of rates. They also challenged the Office Memorandum dated 10.12.2018 as illegal, arbitrary, and unreasonable. Revenue/State's Arguments: The State-Opposite Parties were represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the State-Opposite Parties, but it notes the Court's observation regarding the Petitioner's inability to question the administrative decision at this stage.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
17.03.2021
Heard Mrs. Kananbala Roy Choudhury, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. P.K. Muduli, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties.
The prayer in the present writ petition reads as under:
“It is therefore prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to issue Rule NISI, in the nature of any appropriate writ/writs and/or any other writ/writs and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions calling upon the opp.parties to show cause as to why:- i. why the action and decision of the Opp.parties shall not be declared illegal, unconstitutional and violative of legal right of the petitioner on account of the Taxes being shared and borne by the petitioner on post enactment goods and Service Tax Act 2017, thereby infringing the Goods and Service Tax 2017. ii. the Opp.parties shall not be directed to restitute the benefit of GST to the petitioner along with interest within a stipulated period in respect of work in which the estimated was prepared under the VAT law. iii. the Office memorandum dated 10.12.2018 under Annexure-2 shall not be declared il
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.