Petra Buildcare Products VS Natibal Thermal Power Corporation Ltd

The petitioner was awarded a contract for auctioning the Ash Pond for the collection and sale of cenosphere at NTPC Vindhyachal, valid for one year as per a letter dated January 4, 2019. The petitioner contends that they were initially depositing GST at a rate of 18% as per the terms of the contract. However, they later became aware of a government notification (Annexure P-3) issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, dated November 10, 2017, which reduced the GST rate. Despite this notification, the petitioner claims that they were still being pressured by the respondent to continue depositing GST at the higher rate of 18%. The respondent allegedly threatened coercive actions, including stopping the petitioner’s work, if they did not comply.

The petitioner argues that according to the government notification, they are only required to deposit GST at a rate of 5%, and they are willing to comply with this rate. They have submitted representations regarding this matter, but it remains pending, purportedly under scrutiny with the management and finance department of NTPC. The petitioner requests expedited resolution of this issue and seeks permission to deposit GST at the rate stipulated in the government notification (5%), while also asking for protection from coercive actions by the respondent until the matter is resolved.

After hearing the petitioner’s counsel and considering the arguments presented, the court decides not to issue notices to the other party at the moment. However, it refrains from expressing any opinion on the matter.

The petitioner was awarded a contract to auction Ash Pond for collecting and selling cenosphere at NTPC Vindhyachal for one year, as per a letter dated January 4, 2019. The petitioner asserts that they were initially depositing Goods and Services Tax (GST) at a rate of 18%, as per the terms of the contract. However, they became aware of a government notification (Annexure P-3) dated November 10, 2017, which reduced the GST rate. Despite this, the petitioner was instructed by the department to continue depositing GST at 18%, with the threat of coercive action if they failed to do so. Additionally, the petitioner’s representation regarding this matter has been pending with the management and Finance Department of NTPC, delaying a resolution. The petitioner requests expedited decision-making on their representation and seeks permission to deposit GST at the reduced rate of 5% as per the government notification. They also ask for protection from coercive action until the issue is resolved. After hearing the petitioner’s counsel, the court refrains from issuing a notice to the respondent and does not express an opinion on the matter at present.

The petitioner was awarded a contract for auctioning Ash Pond for the collection and sale of cenosphere at NTPC Vindhyachal for one year, as per a letter dated 4.1.2019. The petitioner contends that they were depositing GST at a rate of 18% as per the contract award. However, they later discovered that the GST rate had been reduced to 5% according to a government notification dated 10.11.2017 (Annexure P-3). Despite this, the department insisted on the petitioner depositing 18% GST regularly and further depositing the difference of 13% of GST. The department threatened coercive action to stop the petitioner’s work if they did not comply.

Additionally, the petitioner submitted a representation, which has not been decided upon. It is alleged that the representation is being kept pending under the pretext of scrutiny by the management and Finance Department of NTPC. The petitioner urges for a speedy resolution of this matter and requests permission to deposit GST at the 5% rate mentioned in the government notification until a decision is made on the representation.

After hearing arguments from the petitioner’s counsel, instead of issuing notice to the other party, the court decides to dispose of the writ petition. The court directs the petitioner to deposit GST for the contract at a rate of 5%, in accordance with the government notification, subject to providing surety for the remaining 13% GST. This directive is subject to the respondents deciding on the representation submitted by the petitioner. The respondents are instructed to make a decision on the representation within one month from the date of communication of the court’s order, taking into consideration the government notification.

The petitioner was awarded a contract for auctioning of Ash Pond for collection and sale of cenosphere at NTPC Vindhyachal for one year. The petitioner contends that they were depositing GST at 18% as per the contract, but later discovered a government notification reducing the GST rate to 5%. Despite this, the department insisted on the 18% rate and threatened coercive action if the petitioner didn’t comply. Additionally, the petitioner’s representation on the matter remained pending, supposedly under scrutiny by NTPC’s management and finance department.

In response, the petitioner urges expedited decision-making on their representation and requests permission to deposit GST at the reduced rate until a decision is reached. After hearing arguments, the court decides not to issue a notice to the other party but instead directs the petitioner to deposit GST at 5% subject to providing surety for the remaining 13%. The respondents are given one month to decide on the representation, and if it’s decided against the petitioner, they can challenge it in a higher forum. Until then, no coercive action is to be taken against the petitioner as long as they comply with the court’s conditions.

In summary, the court orders the petitioner to deposit GST at 5% with surety for the remaining 13% until a decision is made on their representation. No coercive action is to be taken against the petitioner during this period.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: