Deepak Pandey vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, Deepak Pandey, a civil contractor, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the respondent authorities to decide his representation dated November 20, 2023. The representation concerned the refund of excess Goods and Services Tax (GST) paid due to a change in the GST rate on works contracts from 12% to 18% effective July 18, 2022. The petitioner argued that other State Government departments, such as PWD, Water Resources, and Irrigation, had already decided to refund excess GST amounts arising from such rate deviations. He contended that the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, should adopt a similar stance and consider his refund claim. The petitioner's representation to the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, remained undecided.

Held

The Court directed respondents No. 2 and 3 (The Commissioner and Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Raipur) to consider the petitioner's representation dated November 20, 2023, at the earliest, preferably within 90 days from the receipt of the order. While deciding, the authorities were expected to take into account similar decisions made by the State Government concerning contracts executed with other departments like PWD, Irrigation Department, and Water Resources Department. The Court did not delve into the merits of the refund claim itself but focused on ensuring the representation was duly considered in light of the stated precedent. No specific provision of the GST Act was discussed in detail, nor were any specific amounts in dispute quantified in the judgment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of excess GST paid on works contracts due to a change in the GST rate from 12% to 18% effective July 18, 2022, and if so, whether the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, is obligated to consider this claim in light of similar decisions by other State Government departments. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the State Government, through departments like PWD, Water Resources, and Irrigation, had already decided to refund excess GST amounts resulting from rate changes. He contended that the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, should follow this precedent and consider his claim for refund. He highlighted that his representation dated November 20, 2023, to the Municipal Corporation had not yet been decided. Revenue/State's arguments: The counsel for the State had no objection to the petitioner's prayer being allowed, acknowledging that the representation needed to be considered by respondents No. 2 and 3.