M/S.S.N.Kanungo Infrastructure vs. Odisha Construction Corporation LTD.
Held
The Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim, directed the sole opposite party to decide on the representation dated May 27, 2019, within four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. This decision was to be made keeping in mind the revised guidelines in the Government of Odisha, Finance Department Office Memorandum dated December 10, 2018, 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 also stated that no coercive action would be taken against the petitioner until the representation was decided. If the petitioner was aggrieved by the authority's decision, they would be at liberty to challenge it. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, Prasant, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Odisha, seeking a direction for the Senior Manager (Civil), Odisha Construction Corporation Limited (the sole opposite party) to decide on a representation dated May 27, 2019. This representation concerned 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. The petitioner relied on a Government of Odisha, Finance Department Office Memorandum dated December 10, 2018. Despite submitting the representation, no decision had been taken by the opposite party.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct the sole opposite party to decide on the petitioner's representation dated May 27, 2019, concerning the non-reimbursement of differential tax amounts arising from the GST transition, within a specific timeframe? The petitioner argued that their representation, based on a Government of Odisha Finance Department Office Memorandum, had not been decided, and therefore, a direction was necessary. The revenue or State did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
07.02.2020
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the grievance of the petitioner in this case relates to non-reimbursement of the differential tax amount arising out of change in tax regime from Value Added Tax (VAT) to Goods and Service Tax (GST) with effect from 01.07.2017. He further submits that though highlighting all his grievances, the petitioner has submitted a representation on 27.05.2019 before the Senior Manager (Civil), Odisha Construction Corporation Limited, Gopabandhu Nagar, Bhubaneswar (sole opposite party) relying on Government of Odisha, Finance Department Office Memorandum No. FIN-CTI-TAX-0045-2017/38535/F Dated 10.12.2018 (Annexure-3), however, till date, no decision has been taken on such representation. In such background, he prays that a direction be issued to the sole opposite party to take a decision on the above mentioned representation under Annexure-1 within a specific time period.
Considering such submissions and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim, this Court directs the sole opposite party to take a de
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.