Abdur Rouf Khan vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Abdur Rouf Khan, filed a writ petition before the High Court at Calcutta seeking directions against the State of West Bengal and its authorities. The core issue pertains to government contracts, some awarded before and some after the introduction of GST on July 1, 2017. The petitioner argued that the Schedule of Rates (SOR) and Bill of Quantities (BOQ) for these contracts were not updated to include applicable GST. This resulted in an unforeseen additional tax liability for the petitioner, who was executing these contracts. The petitioner sought relief to bear this additional tax liability and to neutralize the impact of this unforeseen tax burden on ongoing contracts awarded before GST, requesting an update of the State SOR to incorporate GST in lieu of the West Bengal VAT.

Held

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an appropriate representation before the Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Government of West Bengal. This representation should be filed within four weeks from the date of the order. Upon receipt, the Additional Chief Secretary is directed to take a final decision within four months. The decision-making process must include consulting with all other relevant departments and providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or their authorized representative. The Additional Chief Secretary is to act in accordance with law, pass a reasoned and speaking order on merit, and consider all judgments of different High Courts that the petitioner intends to rely upon. No coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner until a final decision is reached. The order explicitly states that if the petitioner fails to make the representation within the stipulated time, the order will have no force.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction upon the respondents to bear the additional tax liability arising from the execution of government contracts awarded in the pre-GST regime or post-GST regime without updating the Schedule of Rates (SOR) and Bill of Quantities (BOQ) to incorporate applicable GST? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction upon the respondents to neutralize the impact of unforeseen additional tax burden on government contracts since the introduction of GST on July 1, 2017, for ongoing contracts awarded before that date, and to update the State SOR incorporating applicable GST in lieu of West Bengal VAT? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner contended that the failure to update the SOR and BOQ to reflect GST led to an unforeseen additional tax burden. They sought a direction for the authorities to bear this liability and to adjust the contract terms to account for the GST impact, including updating the SOR to reflect GST instead of the previous VAT. Revenue/State's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the State or its authorities.