M/S S.S. Associates vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by issuing a direction to respondent no. 3, the Executive Engineer, Temporary Khand, (Pra.Pa), Public Works Department, Kaushambi. The direction mandates respondent no. 3 to consider and decide the petitioner's representation, dated 24.9.2021, in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the Court's order. The Court did not make any specific finding on the entitlement to the refund amount of Rs. 20,36,591/- or the merits of the petitioner's claim for further GST amounts, but rather directed the authority to decide the pending representation. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the Court's action was to direct the authority to adjudicate.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s S.S. Associates, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing respondent no. 3, the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Kaushambi, to refund Rs. 20,36,591/- deposited towards Goods and Services Tax (GST). This deposit was made in relation to construction work awarded to the petitioner under a Government Order dated 8.11.2017. The petitioner had submitted a representation dated 24.9.2021 to respondent no. 3 concerning this claim, which remained pending. The petition also sought a direction for the respondent to decide pending representations forthwith.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of Rs. 20,36,591/- deposited towards GST in pursuance to the work of construction allotted to him under the provisions of Government Order dated 8.11.2017, and if so, whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing respondent no. 3 to ensure this refund forthwith? 2. Whether respondent no. 3 should be directed to decide the pending representations of the petitioner forthwith? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they are claiming a further amount on account of GST from respondent no. 3 in accordance with the Government Order dated 8.11.2017. They had submitted a representation on 24.9.2021, which was pending. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondent State or its authorities.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 948 of 2021 Petitioner :- M/S S.S. Associates Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Instant writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs : "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to ensure the refund Rs.20,36,591/- deposited by the petitioner towards Goods and Services Tax in pursuance to the payment against the work of construction allotted to him by the department under the provisions of Government Order dated 8.11.2017 to the petitioner forthwith or within a stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to decide the pending representations of the petitioner forthwith or within a stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (iii)
...........
(iv) ..........." The petitioner is claiming further amount on account of the G.S.T. from
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.