TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petitioner entitled to input tax credit reimbursement on steel for GST paid to Railways under GST framework</h1> <h3>HCC-CPL (JV) Versus The Union of India and 9 Ors. The General Manager Construction N.F. Railway, The Chief Administrative Officer, Construction-Iii N.F. Railway Guwahati, The Chief Accounts Officer/C-1</h3> HCC-CPL (JV) Versus The Union of India and 9 Ors. The General Manager Construction N.F. Railway, The Chief Administrative Officer, Construction-Iii N.F. ... Issues Involved:1. Entitlement to reimbursement of GST on the differential amount of price variation on steel.2. Application of the Price Variation Clause (PVC) post-GST implementation.3. Calculation of PVC claims considering pre-GST and post-GST periods.4. Impact of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the reimbursement of GST.Summary of Judgment:Issue 1: Entitlement to reimbursement of GST on the differential amount of price variation on steel.The court examined whether the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of GST on the differential amount of price variation on steel under the contract. The petitioner, a joint venture awarded a railway construction contract, faced issues in settling PVC claims due to the GST implementation. The court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of GST on the differential amount of price variation on steel.Issue 2: Application of the Price Variation Clause (PVC) post-GST implementation.Clause 46A of the Indian Railway Standard General Conditions of Contract, which includes the PVC, was analyzed. The court noted that post-GST, the formula for calculating PVC was amended to include GST instead of excise duty. The amendments were applicable to tenders invited post-01/07/2017, but the petitioner's contract was awarded prior to this date, leading to confusion in applying the PVC.Issue 3: Calculation of PVC claims considering pre-GST and post-GST periods.The court referred to various circulars and Joint Procedural Orders (JPOs) issued by the Railway Board, which provided guidelines on calculating PVC claims by considering steel costs exclusive of excise duty before 01/07/2017 and exclusive of GST after 01/07/2017. The court emphasized that the petitioner was entitled to GST neutralization, meaning the difference between GST payable on the PVC bill and VAT payable in the pre-GST regime should be reimbursed.Issue 4: Impact of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the reimbursement of GST.The court addressed the contention that since the petitioner availed ITC on the purchase of steel, they should not be reimbursed for GST. The court clarified that ITC is a legally recognized mode of payment under the GST Act and should be credited to the petitioner's electronic credit ledger. The court ruled that the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of GST paid from its electronic credit ledger while computing PVC claims, and this should not be a ground for denial.Conclusion:The court allowed the petition, directing the respondent Railways to pay the PVC claims based on the contract and consider GST paid from the petitioner's electronic credit ledger. The exercise of settling PVC bills should be completed within one month from the date a certified copy of the judgment is served.
TaxTMI 