M/S Maa Vindhya Vasini Constructions vs. State Of U.P. And 8 Others

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition based on the statement made by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent State. The Court directed the respondent-competent authority to take steps for the refund of the admissible amount of GST to the petitioner within a month. The Court found that the respondent had agreed to refund the due amount of GST. The reasoning was based on the undertaking given by the State's counsel. The ratio decidendi is that where the revenue undertakes to refund admissible GST amounts within a stipulated period, the High Court will dispose of the writ petition on that basis, directing compliance. No specific GST provisions were discussed in detail, but the issue revolved around the refund of GST.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Maa Vindhya Vasini Constructions, filed a writ petition seeking payment of GST in respect of work performed and a refund thereof. The respondent, the State of U.P. and others, through the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, stated on instructions that the due amount of GST would be refunded to the petitioner within a month. This statement was made during the hearing of the writ petition. An earlier amendment application to the writ petition was also allowed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the payment and refund of GST in respect of work performed, as claimed. 2. Whether the respondent State is obligated to refund the admissible amount of GST to the petitioner. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner claimed entitlement to the payment and refund of GST for work performed. Respondent's Contention: The respondent State, on the basis of instructions received, stated that the due amount of GST would be refunded to the petitioner within a month. The respondent did not object to the amendment application filed by the petitioner.