A.K. Constructions vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, A.K. Constructions, through its partner Rakesh Agrawal, filed a writ petition before the Chhattisgarh High Court. The petitioner's grievance was the inaction of the respondents (State of Chhattisgarh and its officials) in refunding GST collected from the petitioner during the execution of a contract. The contract was awarded prior to the implementation of the GST regime on July 1, 2017. The petitioner contended that the Government of Chhattisgarh had issued a circular allowing refunds of GST paid on contracts executed before July 1, 2017, upon production of certificates of GST payment. Despite repeated approaches, the petitioner alleged a total lack of action from the respondents regarding the refund. The State counsel indicated that the claim would be decided after verification of facts and its eligibility under the relevant State Government circulars.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the State Authorities to immediately process the petitioner's claim for GST refund. This processing is to be done after due verification of facts and the petitioner's entitlement. The Court emphasized that an appropriate decision should be taken keeping in view the State Government's order dated October 10, 2018, and all subsequent related orders. The State Authorities were also directed to consider the petitioner's contention that GST refunds have been granted in similar cases. A decision is to be made within 90 days from the receipt of the order. The Court did not explicitly leave any issue undecided, but the core decision hinges on the verification and entitlement process.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of GST collected on a contract awarded prior to July 1, 2017, under the circulars issued by the Government of Chhattisgarh? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they are entitled to a refund of GST paid on contracts executed before the GST regime came into force, as per the Government of Chhattisgarh's circular. They stated that the respondents have failed to act on their repeated requests for this refund. Respondent's Contention: The State counsel submitted that the claim would be considered subject to verification of facts and whether the petitioner's claim falls within the scope of the circulars and orders issued by the State Government concerning GST refunds for pre-GST regime contracts.