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>Court Invalidates GST Orders for Pre-GST Contracts, Protecting Contractors from Unjust Tax Demands.</h1> <h3>Sri K.G. Patil, Sri Basavaraj b. Areshankar Versus State Of Karnataka, The Asst. Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Audit-1 Vijayapura, The Executive Engineer, Pwp And Iwtd, Vijayapura, The Executive Engineer, Rural Drinking Water And Sanitation Division, Vijayapura, The Executive Engineer Kbjnl, The Executive Engineer, Panchayathraj Engineering Division, Vijayapura</h3> Sri K.G. Patil, Sri Basavaraj b. Areshankar Versus State Of Karnataka, The Asst. Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Audit-1 Vijayapura, The Executive ... Issues Involved:The issues involve the payment of GST on works contracts executed under the VAT regime, the validity of show cause notices issued under the GST Act, and the applicability of amended provisions post-GST regime.Judgment Details:Issue 1: Payment of Differential GST AmountThe writ petitions sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the differential GST amount for works contracts executed under the VAT regime. The petitioners, civil contractors, argued that the schedule rates were fixed under the KVAT regime, and therefore, the show cause notices and orders issued under the GST Act were incorrect. They relied on a previous court order emphasizing that tax components are statutory payments to be honored by the respondents. The court agreed with the petitioners, stating that when a contract is concluded with rates fixed under the KVAT regime, petitioners cannot be directed to pay GST for completed work. Consequently, the show cause notices and orders were deemed baseless and quashed.Issue 2: Validity of Show Cause NoticesThe respondents argued that post-amendment to the GST Act, petitioners are obligated to pay taxes as per the amended provisions, not the rates fixed in agreements. They contended that citizens must adhere strictly to fiscal statutes. However, the court held that in cases where contracts were finalized under the KVAT regime with rates pre-GST, petitioners cannot be forced to pay GST for completed work. The court found the show cause notices and orders to be unfounded and lacking basis, leading to their quashing.Conclusion:The High Court of Karnataka allowed the writ petitions, thereby quashing the show cause notice and order issued to the petitioners. The court emphasized that when contracts were entered into under the KVAT regime with rates fixed accordingly, petitioners cannot be compelled to pay GST for completed work. The judgment highlighted the necessity to honor statutory tax components and concluded that the show cause notices and orders lacked merit in the given circumstances.
TaxTMI 