M/S Raj Construction Through Its Power Of Attorney Mr. Rahul Jaswal vs. Union Of INDIA Finance And Corporate Ministry Chairman And Others
Held
The Court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's claim regarding the implementation of 18% GST on construction works from July 18, 2022, as per Letter No. 177/09/2022-T.R.U. Instead, the Court directed the petitioner to make a fresh, detailed representation to respondent no. 4, the Chief Executive Engineer, Construction Division - 3, P.W.D. Sultanpur, within two weeks. This representation should include all grievances and supporting documents. Respondent no. 3 is then mandated to consider and decide this representation within two months of receiving it, by way of a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with the law. The Court explicitly stated that it had not applied itself to the merits of the case, leaving all questions open for the competent authority to decide.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Raj Construction, through its Power of Attorney Mr. Rahul Jaswal, filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus directing respondent no. 4, the Chief Executive Engineer, Construction Division - 3, P.W.D. Sultanpur, to comply with a letter from the Ministry of Finance regarding the implementation of GST at 18% on all construction works from July 18, 2022. The petitioner's counsel submitted that their grievance would be substantially addressed if their representation was considered and decided promptly. The Standing Counsel for the State had no objection to this approach. The Court permitted the petitioner to submit a fresh, detailed representation to respondent no. 4 within two weeks, attaching the writ petition and supporting documents.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct respondent no. 4 to comply with Letter No. 177/09/2022-T.R.U. issued by the Ministry of Finance regarding the implementation of 18% GST on construction works from July 18, 2022? The petitioner argued that compliance with this letter was necessary to address their grievance concerning GST on construction works. The respondent (State) did not present any arguments against this, having no objection to the petitioner's request for a representation to be considered. The Court's decision was not based on the merits of the GST implementation or the specific letter, but rather on the procedural aspect of representation.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:59593-DB Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 185 of 2023 Petitioner :- M/S Raj Construction Through Its Power Of Attorney Mr. Rahul Jaswal Respondent :- Union Of India Finance And Corporate Ministry Chairman And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Bahadur Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.
Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus Commanding to the opposite parties, specifically opposite party no. 4 i.e. Chief Executive Engineer Construction Division - 3 P.W.D. Sultanpur, to comply with Letter No. 177/09/2022- T.R.U. issued by the Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue (Tax Research Unit) Government of India regarding the implementation of GST, 18% GST provision has been made on all construction works from 18-07-2022, in the interest of justice."
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of petitioner would be substantially met in case representation of petitioner for
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.