Gordhandas Gobindram VS State Of Chhattisgarh

The petitioner has filed a writ petition concerning the additional tax liability they have incurred due to the introduction of the GST law effective from July 1, 2017. The core issue involves a contract or work order that was given to the petitioner, which has been impacted by the new GST regulations.

The petitioner has filed a writ petition concerning an additional tax liability incurred following the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) law effective from July 1, 2017. The issue arises from a contract or work order given to the petitioner before the implementation of the GST law. Due to the new GST regulations, the petitioner was required to pay extra tax, which they are now seeking to have refunded by the respondents. The petitioner’s counsel has placed reliance on specific arguments and precedents to support this claim for a refund.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner regarding additional tax liability incurred due to the introduction of the GST law effective from July 1, 2017.

The issue concerns a contract or work order awarded to the petitioner before the GST law was introduced. Because of the new GST law, the petitioner had to pay additional tax, which they now seek to be refunded by the respondents. The petitioner’s counsel has referred to an order from the State Government dated October 10, 2018, in which the Public Works Department (PWD) made a policy decision. This decision ensures the reimbursement of additional tax liabilities for contractors concerning contracts awarded before July 1, 2017, when the GST law came into effect.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner concerning the additional tax liability incurred due to the introduction of the GST law from July 1, 2017, onwards. The issue revolves around a contract or work order awarded to the petitioner before the implementation of the GST law. With the new GST law in effect, the petitioner faced additional tax liabilities, which they now seek to have refunded by the respondents.

The petitioner’s counsel relies on a State Government order dated October 10, 2018, in which the Public Works Department decided to reimburse contractors for additional tax liabilities arising from contracts awarded before July 1, 2017, the date the GST law was enacted. Additionally, the petitioner’s counsel references a similar case, WPT No. 94 of 2020 (M/s D.A. Enterprises v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), where this Court, under identical circumstances, allowed the writ petition on November 17, 2022.

In summary, the petitioner is requesting a refund for the additional tax paid due to the GST law, based on a prior government order and a precedent set by a similar court case.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner regarding the additional tax liability incurred due to the introduction of the GST law effective from July 1, 2017.

The petitioner received a contract/work order before the GST law was implemented. As a result of the new GST law, the petitioner faced additional tax liabilities, which they now seek to be reimbursed by the respondents. The petitioner’s counsel relies on a State Government order dated October 10, 2018, in which the Public Works Department decided to reimburse contractors for additional tax liabilities incurred on contracts awarded before July 1, 2017. The petitioner also references a similar case, WPT No. 94 of 2020 (M/s D.A. Enterprises v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), where the Court ruled in favor of the petitioner on November 17, 2022.

Conversely, the State Counsel argues that the petitioner must submit a fresh claim with all relevant documentation proving the additional tax liability incurred due to the GST law. The petitioner needs to provide evidence of the additional payments made to support their claim for reimbursement.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner concerning additional tax liability incurred due to the introduction of the GST law from July 1, 2017. The issue revolves around a contract or work order awarded to the petitioner before the GST law was implemented. Because of the new GST law, the petitioner had to pay extra taxes, which they now seek to be refunded by the respondents. The petitioner’s counsel relies on a State Government order dated October 10, 2018, where the Public Works Department decided to reimburse additional tax liabilities for contracts awarded before the GST law came into force.

Additionally, the petitioner’s counsel refers to a previous court order in WPT No. 94 of 2020 (M/s D.A. Enterprises v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), where the court granted similar relief under the same circumstances on November 17, 2022. Conversely, the State Counsel argues that the petitioner’s claim will be considered if they submit a fresh claim with all relevant proof of the additional tax liability incurred, as per the State Government’s order dated October 10, 2018.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: