Vijay Hingu Yadav vs. The Union Of INDIA And Others
Held
The Court noted the submissions made by both the petitioners and the Railway Department. It was stated by the petitioners that they would approach the Railway Department. Crucially, the counsel for the Railway Department made a statement that the amount of GST had not been deducted from the petitioners, referencing guidelines dated 27.10.2017. The Court observed that a supplementary agreement may be executed between the petitioners and the Railways as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months, provided there are no other impediments. Based on these observations and statements, 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 contractors who had entered into agreements with the Railway Department. The core of the dispute appears to revolve around the Goods and Services Tax (GST) and its deduction or non-deduction by the Railways. The petitioners sought a resolution concerning their GST liabilities or payments related to their contracts with the Railway Department. The Railway Department, represented by its counsel, indicated that a supplementary agreement would be executed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Railway Department has deducted the amount of GST from the petitioners, as per the guidelines dated 27.10.2017? Petitioner's argument: The petitioners, through their counsel Mr. Talhar, submitted that they would approach the Railway Department. Revenue/Respondent's argument: Mr. Navandar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4 (likely representing the Railway Department), made a statement that the amount of GST has not been deducted by the Railways from the petitioners, citing guidelines dated 27.10.2017.
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.