M/S.Rout Infrastructure PVT.LTD vs. The Executive Engineer,Jarka

Held

The Court directed the sole opposite party, the Executive Engineer, Jarka Irrigation Division, to take a decision on the petitioner's representation dated December 26, 2018, within a period of four weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order. This decision is to be made keeping in mind the revised guidelines contained in the Government of Odisha, Finance Department's Office Memorandum No. FIN-CTI-TAX-0045-2017/36116/F dated December 7, 2017, and in accordance with the law. The petitioner was also directed to supply a copy of their representation along with the certified copy of the order to expedite the disposal. The Court explicitly stated that no coercive action would be taken against the petitioner until the representation is disposed of. The Court also noted that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the authority, they are free to challenge it. The merits of the claim were not expressed upon.

Facts

The petitioner, aggrieved by the non-reimbursement of differential tax amounts arising from the transition from Value Added Tax (VAT) to Goods and Services Tax (GST) effective from July 1, 2017, submitted a representation on December 26, 2018, to the Executive Engineer, Jarka Irrigation Division. This representation relied on the Government of Odisha, Finance Department's Office Memorandum No. FIN-CTI-TAX-0045-2017/36116/F dated December 7, 2017. The petitioner contended that no decision had been taken on their representation to date. Consequently, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction for the sole opposite party to decide the representation within a specified timeframe.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should direct the respondent authority to decide the petitioner's representation concerning the non-reimbursement of differential tax amounts arising from the VAT to GST transition, as per the Government of Odisha, Finance Department's Office Memorandum dated December 7, 2017. Petitioner's Contentions: - The petitioner argued that their representation, submitted on December 26, 2018, highlighting grievances related to the differential tax amount due to the VAT to GST regime change, had not been decided by the respondent authority. - They relied on the Government of Odisha, Finance Department's Office Memorandum No. FIN-CTI-TAX-0045-2017/36116/F dated December 7, 2017, as the basis for their claim. - The petitioner prayed for a direction to the sole opposite party to take a decision on their representation within a specific time period. Revenue/State's Contentions: - The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue or state.