Aditya Construction Through Its Proprietor Prasad Suresh Kulkarni vs. The Union Of INDIA And Others
Held
The Court noted the submissions made by both the petitioners and the Railway Department. It was submitted by the petitioners and the Railway Department that supplementary agreements would be executed. Mr. Talhar, learned counsel for the petitioners, stated that the petitioners would approach the Railway within a week. Crucially, Mr. Navandar, learned counsel for the Railway Department, made a statement that, in view of the Railway Department's guidelines dated October 27, 2017, the amount of GST has not been deducted by the Railways from the petitioners. The Court directed that the supplementary agreement may be executed between the petitioners and the Railways as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months, if there is no other impediment. With these observations, the writ petitions were disposed of.
Facts
A batch of writ petitions was filed by various contractors and individuals against the Union of India and others. The petitioners were engaged in contractual work, likely with the Railway Department, as indicated by the submissions. The core issue revolved around the deduction or non-deduction of GST amounts by the Railways from the payments due to the petitioners. The Railway Department, through its counsel, made a statement regarding the non-deduction of GST based on its guidelines dated October 27, 2017. The petitioners indicated their intention to approach the Railway Department for the execution of supplementary agreements.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Railway Department has deducted the Goods and Services Tax (GST) amount from the payments due to the petitioners, and if so, what is the basis for such deduction or non-deduction? (This issue arises from the dispute concerning the treatment of GST by the Railways). The petitioners, through their counsel Mr. Talhar, argued that they would approach the Railway Department to execute supplementary agreements. The Railway Department, represented by Mr. Navandar, stated that based on their guidelines dated October 27, 2017, the GST amount has not been deducted from the petitioners. The revenue or State's arguments are not explicitly recorded beyond the statement made by the Railway Department's counsel.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
(1) 1wp81202018 & Ors. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1 WRIT PETITION NO.8120 OF 2018 M/S S J SURANA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS THROUGH ITS PARTNER RAJESH SUGANCHAND SURANA ..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS WITH 2 WRIT PETITION NO.8121 OF 2018 VIJAY HINGU YADAV ..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS WITH 3 WRIT PETITION NO.8122 OF 2018 ABHIJIT DNYANDEV PATIL ..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS WITH 4 WRIT PETITION NO.8123 OF 2018 M/S AISHWARYA CONSTRUCTION THROUGH IS PROPRIETOR S D JAGTAP
..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS WITH 5 WRIT PETITION NO.8124 OF 2018 M/S ASHOK DODHU KAVATHE THROUGH ITS PARTNER ASHOK
(2) 1wp81202018 & Ors. DODHU KAVATHE
..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS WITH 6 WRIT PETITION NO.8125 OF 2018 M/S PITAMBAR VENSI THROUGH ITS PARTNER PITAMBAR VENSITEKWANI
..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS WITH 7 WRIT PETITION NO.8126 OF 2018 NAVIN RANCHODDAS RATHOD ..PETITIONER VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..RESP
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 Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.