https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426152 HC dismissed the writ petition on grounds of limitation, holding that claims arising from a works contract dated April 2016 with 11-month completion period were time-barred. The court declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction to determine GST reimbursement claims, noting that segregation of labor and material components for differential GST calculation falls within the domain of authorities under CGST/OGST Act, not the court. The petitioner's claim for GST reimbursement was deemed a disputed question of fact requiring case-by-case calculation beyond the court's writ jurisdiction. en-us Mon, 04 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Apr 2025 12:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426152 HC dismissed the writ petition on grounds of limitation, holding that claims arising from a works contract dated April 2016 with 11-month completion period were time-barred. The court declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction to determine GST reimbursement claims, noting that segregation of labor and material components for differential GST calculation falls within the domain of authorities under CGST/OGST Act, not the court. The petitioner's claim for GST reimbursement was deemed a disputed question of fact requiring case-by-case calculation beyond the court's writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws GST Mon, 04 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426152