Writ maintainability despite alternative remedy, and reimbursement of excess GST paid where tax liability was established.

A writ petition under Article 226 was held maintainable despite an alternative contractual remedy because no disputed questions of fact required adjudication, so the petitioner was not relegated to the contractual dispute forum. On the GST issue, the Court accepted that excess tax had been paid for the relevant period and that the applicable liability supported reimbursement of the differential amount at 6% for the specified period. The respondents were directed to pay the differential GST within three months, failing which interest at 6% per annum would apply.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of an alternative contractual remedy. (ii) Whether the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the excess GST paid for the relevant period.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of an alternative contractual remedy.

Analysis: The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The objection of alternate remedy under the agreement was rejected because no disputed questions of fact arose for adjudication, and the petitioner was not required to be relegated to the dispute resolution forum.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable and was not barred by the alternative remedy clause.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the excess GST paid for the relevant period.

Analysis: The work was subjected to GST at the applicable rate under Notification No. 24/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 21.09.2017, and the Court accepted the petitioner's case that GST had been paid in excess for the period from 01.01.2022 to 24.01.2022. The State GST Department also indicated that the higher rate was payable by the government entity concerned.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the difference in GST at 6% for the period from 01.01.2022 to 24.01.2022.

Final Conclusion: The respondents were directed to pay the differential GST amount within three months, with interest at 6% per annum in default, and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable notwithstanding an alternative contractual remedy where no disputed questions of fact arise, and excess GST paid on the same transaction can be directed to be reimbursed when the applicable tax liability is established.

---