M/S Gangotri Construction Through Its Partner Anuj Anand vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the differential GST amount. It found that the GST rate had indeed been enhanced from 12% to 18% effective January 1, 2022, as confirmed by Notification No. 15/2021 CT(R) and acknowledged by the State GST Department. The Court noted that respondent No. 2 had accepted its liability to pay the additional 6% GST. The Court rejected the respondents' objections regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, stating that no disputed question of facts was involved. Consequently, respondent No. 2 was directed to pay the difference of GST amount to the petitioner at 6% for the period from January 1, 2022, to September 30, 2022, within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order. If payment was not made within this period, the petitioner would be entitled to interest at 6% per annum from the date of entitlement. The writ petition was disposed of to this extent.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Gangotri Construction, a firm engaged in construction work, filed a writ petition seeking reimbursement of extra GST paid between January 1, 2022, and September 30, 2022, along with interest. The petitioner was awarded several works by respondent No. 2, a public enterprise classified as a Government Entity. The GST rate on the petitioner's services was initially 12% until December 31, 2021. Subsequently, vide Notification No. 15/2021 CT(R) dated November 18, 2021, the GST rate was enhanced to 18% effective January 1, 2022. The petitioner's grievance was that respondent No. 2 continued to pay GST at 12% on running bills, forcing the petitioner to pay the enhanced 18%. Respondent No. 2 acknowledged the liability to pay the additional 6% GST but stated that approval from the State Government was pending. The State GST Department confirmed the rate enhancement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of the differential GST amount paid at 18% instead of 12% for the period January 1, 2022, to September 30, 2022, as per Notification No. 15/2021 CT(R)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the GST rate was legally enhanced to 18% from January 1, 2022, and respondent No. 2's continued payment at 12% resulted in the petitioner bearing the additional burden. They relied on the fact that respondent No. 2 had accepted this liability and that the State GST Department also confirmed the rate change. The petitioner argued that no disputed question of facts was involved, making the writ petition maintainable. Respondents' arguments: Respondents No. 2 & 3 raised objections regarding the maintainability of the writ petition and the availability of an alternative remedy under the Arbitration Act. The State GST Department (Respondent No. 4) did not appear to have raised any specific arguments against the petitioner's claim but confirmed the rate enhancement.