M/S S.K. Traders And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Held
The Court directed the third respondent to examine the petitioners' claim and take necessary further steps in terms of the communication sent by the Finance Controller dated 10.09.2021. This action is to be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a copy of the Court's order. The Court found it appropriate to issue this direction given the facts of the case, where admitted dues were being withheld despite a clarification from the Finance Controller. The Court did not delve into the merits of the GST credit issue itself but focused on ensuring the administrative process, as clarified by the Finance Controller, was followed. The ratio of the decision is that administrative authorities must act upon clear clarifications from higher financial authorities regarding financial matters to resolve pending dues.
Facts
The petitioners, M/S S.K. Traders and Another, were awarded contract work by the Department of Medical and Health Services of the State of U.P. It is alleged that the amount payable for this work was wrongly credited to the GST account. Following this, the petitioners brought the correct facts to the attention of the authorities. The Finance Controller issued a clarifying letter on 10.09.2021. Despite this clarification, the third respondent has not taken consequential action, and the admitted dues payable to the petitioners remain withheld. The petitioners have filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking redressal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the third respondent is obligated to take consequential action based on the clarification provided by the Finance Controller regarding the wrongly credited GST amount? (Question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and application of administrative procedures and contractual obligations). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argues that the admitted dues are being withheld despite a clear clarification from the Finance Controller on 10.09.2021, and that consequential action should be taken promptly. Respondent's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent states that the grievance of the petitioners would be examined in accordance with law.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28032 of 2021 Petitioner :- M/S S.K. Traders And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
Certain contract work was awarded to petitioners by the Department of Medical and Health Services of the State. It appears that the amount payable was wrongly credited to the GST account. After the correct facts were placed before the authorities, the Finance Controller has clarified the position vide letter dated 10.09.2021. Grievance of the petitioner is that notwithstanding such clarification consequential action is not being taken by the third respondent and admitted dues continue to remain withheld.
Learned Standing Counsel states that such grievance of the petitioners would be got examined in accordance with law.
In the facts of the case, it would be appropriate to direct the third respondent to examine petitioners' claim and take necessary further steps in terms of the communication sent by the Finance Controller dated 10.09.2021 within a period of four weeks from the date of production of copy of this order.
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.