Subham Infrastructure Having Office vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of at the admission stage by directing respondent No. 4 (The Senior Divisional Engineer (Co. Ord.) South East Central Railway Nagpur Maharashtra) to take a decision on the representation filed by the petitioner. This decision is to be made in accordance with the circulars governing the field. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim. Any decision taken by the respondents would be purely in accordance with the governing circulars. The operative direction was for respondent No. 4 to decide the representation within 120 days from the receipt of the order's copy.
Facts
The petitioner, Subham Infrastructure, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents, South East Central Railway and its various officials, to consider their representation for reassessment or adjustment of the GST amount. This claim pertains to a contract entered into before the introduction of the GST regime. The petitioner's grievance is that the GST amount needs to be adjusted in light of a circular issued by the respondent-Railways on February 28, 2018, which was in the context of the new GST law. The writ petition was filed seeking this specific relief.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondents are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation for reassessment/adjustment of the GST amount in terms of the respondent-Railways' circular dated 28.02.2018, given that the contract predates the GST regime? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that their representation for reassessment/adjustment of the GST amount should be considered in accordance with the circular issued by the respondent-Railways on February 28, 2018, which was issued in the backdrop of the introduction of the new GST law. They sought a direction for the respondents to act upon this representation. Respondents' contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the respondents regarding the merits of the petitioner's claim or their obligation to consider the representation. The Court's order suggests the respondents were directed to consider the representation based on existing circulars.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 2392 of 2020 Subham Infrastructure Having Office At L-2, Vinoba Nagar, Near Amba Tower Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. Through Its Partner Shri Uday Nath Jha, S/o Late Shri Sadanand Jha, Aged About 50 Years, R/o At L-2, Vinoba Nagar, Near Amba Tower Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus
Union of India Through The General Manager, South East Central Railway Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
The Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer South East Central Railway Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
Principal Chief Engineer South East Central Railway Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
The Senior Divisional Engineer (Co. Ord.) South East Central Railway Nagpur Maharastra.
The Senior Divisional Finance Manager South East Central Railway Nagpur Maharastra.
The Senior Divisional Engineer (Central) South East Central Railway Nagpur Maharastra. ---Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate. For Respondents : Shri Abhishek Sinha, Advocate.
F Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on B
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 Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.