Rakshak Securitas PVT LTD vs. All INDIA Institute Of Medical Sciences

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s Rakshak Securitas Pvt Ltd, filed a writ petition seeking reimbursement of GST and service tax amounts paid for services rendered to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). The Petitioner claimed Rs. 12,18,081/- for service tax (April 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017) and Rs. 1,16,28,532/- for GST (July 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018). AIIMS filed a status report indicating that claims totaling Rs. 1,16,28,532/- against three agreements were received. A portion of the GST claim (Rs. 3,81,908/- for June 2018 to September 2018) was released, and the remaining claims were under verification. AIIMS's counsel stated that the entire amount was received by the Petitioner on March 30, 2023, while the Petitioner's counsel argued for entitlement to interest.

Held

The Court noted that AIIMS had filed a status report detailing the receipt of GST claims against specific agreements, totaling Rs. 1,16,28,532/-. A portion of the claim (Rs. 3,81,908/-) had been released, and the remaining claims were being verified. AIIMS's counsel stated that the entire amount was paid on March 30, 2023. The Court observed that the Petitioner's claim for interest could not be determined at this stage, especially as the Petitioner had been subject to an investigation by the GST Department, involving a significant deposit. The Court found that any other amounts due would require a factual inquiry beyond the scope of the writ petition. The Court directed AIIMS's counsel to provide a breakup of payments or deductions to the Petitioner's counsel. The Petitioner's remedies, if any, were left open after receiving this computation. The issue of interest was deferred pending clarification on the payment of the principal amount.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of GST and service tax amounts paid to AIIMS for services rendered, and if so, what is the quantum of outstanding dues? This issue turns on the contractual obligations between the Petitioner and AIIMS and the procedural steps taken for reimbursement. The Petitioner argued that reimbursements were not issued despite repeated reminders and that they are entitled to the full claimed amounts. The Respondent (AIIMS) argued that claims were received and were under verification, with a portion already released and the remainder purportedly paid on March 30, 2023. 2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to interest on the delayed payment of the reimbursements? This issue hinges on whether the delay in payment was unjustified and if the Petitioner suffered financial loss due to it. The Petitioner contended for interest, while AIIMS's counsel stated that the Petitioner was unable to point out any component of interest deposited with the GST Department, and that the entire principal amount had not been paid.