TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 858
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mr.R.P.Pratapsingh, learned Government Advocate on behalf of first respondent in both the writ petitions, Mr.S.Sathish, learned Standing Counsel for Salem City Municipal Corporation on behalf of second respondent in both the writ petitions and Mr.K.S.Ramaswamy, learned Standing counsel on behalf of third respondent in both the writ petitions are before this Court. 2. With consent of all the aforesaid learned counsel, main writ petitions are taken up, heard out and are being disposed of. 3. Subject matter of instant writ petitions is a contract between the second respondent the Salem City Municipal Corporation and the writ petitioner company. The contract is dated 23.01.2015 and this Court is informed that the contract is for providin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... other words, it is 1% as State GST and 1% as Central GST, totalling 2%. On this basis, second respondent informed the writ petitioner that they would be deducting 2% at the time of making payments under said contract pursuant to which work is under progress. There is no disagreement before this Court that 2% tax is so being deducted at source (TDS) by the 2nd respondent now. 9. Adverting to the prescribed rates of GST contained in Chapter 24 and the relevant entry viz., Heading 9954 captioned 'Construction Services', it is submitted that the GST liability qua aforementioned contract dated 23.01.2015 is 12% and the same reads as follows: Serial No. Chapter, Section or Heading Description of Service IGST Rate Condit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or plant for (1)water supply, (ii) water treatment, or (iii) sewerage treatment or disposal Provided that where the services are supplied to a Government Entity, they should have been procured by the said entity in relation to a work entrusted to it by the Central Government, State Government, Union territory or local, as the case may be ............. 10. There is no disputation or disagreement before this Court that the tax liability is 12 % for aforesaid contract. 11. This has impelled the writ petitioner to file the instant writ petitions, with prayers inter alia to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to pay the difference of 10% GST on the original agreed contract value, so that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Salaries] Department, dated 09.10.2017 came to be issued. 18. There is a short history post Government Order also. This Government Order being G.O.Ms.No.296, Finance [Salaries] Department, dated 09.10.2017 came to be challenged in this Court by way of W.P.No.2307 of 2018. The challenge failed and the writ petition came to be disposed of by an order dated 28.01.2019 by a Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court. Writ petition was carried in apeal by way of an intra Court appeal being W.A.No.1499 of 2019 and the intra Court appeal also came to be dismissed by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.06.2019. 19. This Court is informed that the aforesaid challenge to G.O.Ms.No.296, Finance [Salaries] Department, da....