2024 (9) TMI 389 - HC - GST

High Court Upholds Contractor's Claim, Orders GST Refund for Pre-2018 Contract Under Section 54 of CGST Act

The HC allowed the writ petition challenging GST deduction for a pre-2018 contract. The court directed authorities to process the refund claim within ... Illegality of retrospective GST deduction on payments relating to contracts executed when Value Added Tax prevailed - Right to refund of illegally deducted tax - Administrative disposal of representations for refund within a prescribed reasonable timeIllegality of retrospective GST deduction on payments relating to contracts executed when Value Added Tax prevailed - Right to refund of illegally deducted tax - Petitioner permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to seek refund of GST deducted from payments for a contract executed in 2009 and completed before 2015 on the ground that VAT was the prevailing levy at the relevant time. - HELD THAT: - The petitioner informed the Court that the admitted dues have been paid but that the authorities deducted GST at 18% from payments relating to a contract entrusted in 2009 and completed before 2015, a period when VAT - not GST - prevailed. In view of this grievance, the Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition while preserving the petitioner's right to approach the appropriate authorities for a refund of the GST allegedly deducted without lawful basis. The Court did not adjudicate the substantive refund claim on merits but afforded the petitioner an avenue for administrative redress.Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to approach authorities for refund of the GST deducted.Administrative disposal of representations for refund within a prescribed reasonable time - Authorities directed to consider and dispose of any representation submitted by the petitioner for refund of the deducted GST strictly in accordance with law and expeditiously, preferably within eight weeks from the date of representation. - HELD THAT: - Recognising that the petitioner may pursue a refund application, the Court mandated that any representation made by the petitioner be disposed of strictly in accordance with law. The Court imposed a timeline, expressing a preference that the authorities conclude the disposal as expeditiously as possible and preferably within eight weeks from receipt of the representation. The direction is administrative and confined to prompt consideration; no substantive determination on entitlement to refund was made by the Court.Authorities to dispose of the petitioner's representation for refund strictly in accordance with law, preferably within eight weeks.Final Conclusion: The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn while preserving the petitioner's right to seek refund of GST allegedly deducted in respect of a contract executed in 2009 and completed before 2015; any representation made by the petitioner shall be disposed of by the authorities in accordance with law, preferably within eight weeks. The petitioner's grievance regarding the deduction of GST at 18% for a contract completed before GST came into effect in 2018 was redressed. The writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to seek refund of the illegally deducted GST. Authorities directed to process refund claims within eight weeks. (Case: High Court PATNA, Citation: TMI, Judge: MR. A. ABHISHEK REDDY)