GST reimbursement claims require supporting proof, with authorities directed to reconsider the claim within a fixed time.

A claim for differential GST reimbursement arising from a government works contract was not granted outright because proof of actual GST payment had not been furnished on the material then available. The Court recorded the respondents' stand that the claim could be examined if supporting documents were produced, and directed the petitioner to submit those documents within the fixed time. It further required the respondents to consider the reimbursement claim and pass orders in accordance with law within a stipulated period. The operative effect was a limited mandamus for time-bound reconsideration, not an immediate declaration of entitlement or monetary relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to a writ direction for reimbursement of differential GST and consideration of its claim on production of supporting documents evidencing payment of GST.

Analysis: The petition arose from a claim for differential GST reimbursement in respect of work executed under a government contract after the introduction of GST. The respondents stated that the claim could not be processed on the material then available because supporting proof of actual GST payment had not been furnished, but undertook to examine the claim if such documents were produced. The Court recorded this submission and fashioned relief accordingly, directing production of supporting documents within a fixed time and requiring the respondents to examine the claim and pass orders in accordance with law within a stipulated period.

Conclusion: The petitioner obtained a limited mandamus for consideration of the GST reimbursement claim, and the writ petition was allowed with directions.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner secured a time-bound administrative reconsideration of the GST reimbursement claim, rather than an outright declaration of entitlement or immediate monetary relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a tax reimbursement claim is supported by an assurance of examination on production of proof, the Court may direct submission of documents and require the authority to decide the claim within a fixed time in accordance with law.

---