Vishnu Prasad Dubey vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that Respondent No. 2, the Municipal Corporation, Katni, should deposit the State GST amount deducted from the petitioner's bills with Respondent No. 1, the State of Madhya Pradesh, within 30 days. The reasoning was based on the consensus reached between the parties. The Court directed that upon compliance with this order, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail the benefit of a refund, if admissible in law. The Court did not delve into the merits of the refund claim itself, but focused on ensuring the deposited amount was with the appropriate authority. No issues were expressly left undecided, as the matter was resolved by consent.

Facts

The petitioner, Vishnu Prasad Dubey, a government electrical contractor, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. He alleged that Respondent No. 2, the Municipal Corporation, Katni, deducted State GST from his contractor bills but failed to deposit this amount with the State GST Authority. The petitioner had made a representation to the Administrator of the Municipal Corporation, which remained unheeded. The petitioner's counsel restricted the prayer to a direction for Respondent No. 2 to forward the deducted GST amount to Respondent No. 1 (State of Madhya Pradesh) to enable the petitioner to claim a refund if legally admissible. The respondents agreed to this course of action.

Key Issues

1. Whether Respondent No. 2, the Municipal Corporation, Katni, should be directed to deposit the State GST amount deducted from the petitioner's bills with the State GST Authority, considering the petitioner's claim that the amount was deducted but not deposited. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the State GST was deducted from his bills by the Municipal Corporation, but this deducted amount was not remitted to the State GST Authority. He sought a direction for the deposit of this amount to facilitate his claim for a refund, if legally entitled. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, agreed to the petitioner's prayer for a direction to deposit the deducted GST amount. They did not raise any objections or present counter-arguments against the petitioner's claim or prayer.