The grievance of the applicant company is that despite deposit of GST from its own source, opposite parties failed to refund the applicant the tax component.
Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017—Refund ---The petitioner was awarded certain contracts. The contract was awarded before enactment of Act, 2017 on 1 July 2017. Before the enactment of Act, the tax was levied at source at 4% of contract value under the VAT. After the enactment of this Act, the rate was revised at 12% of the contract value. The Government of U.P. issued guidelines on 8 November 2017, for reimbursement of the GST to the contractor in relation to the on going contracts having regard to change in tax structure regime. The contractor would, however, have to deposit the GST at 12% of the value of the work. The applicant company submitted that despite deposit of GST from its own source, opposite parties failed to refund the applicant the tax component. The applicant filed a writ petition which was disposed on 12 September 2019 directing the respondent-competent authority to take steps for refund of admissible amount of GST to petitioner within a month. The respondent no. 1 submitted that they have released the tax component to the respondent opposite party no. 2, but said amount has not been released by the respondent no. 2, who is avoiding the compliance on one pretext or the other. The court observed that the approach adopted by the opposite party no. 2 in withholding the amount and not crediting the tax component with the applicant/company after receiving the amount from the opposite party no. 1, is not conducive. The court further observed that the matter is serious and calls for attention of the highest officer of the State.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed the Principal Secretary, PWD U.P. shall summon the officers and get the matter settled. In the event the Principal Secretary is of the opinion that the opposite party no. 2, has been unnecessarily harassing and creating impediment in releasing the amount, it will be open for the Principal Secretary to initiate proceedings including the disciplinary proceedings against the opposite party no. 2. List on 18.02.2021.
The grievance of the applicant company is that despite deposit of GST from its own source, opposite parties failed to refund the applicant the tax component.
Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017—Refund ---The petitioner was awarded certain contracts. The contract was awarded before enactment of Act, 2017 on 1 July 2017. Before the enactment of Act, the tax was levied at source at 4% of contract value under the VAT. After the enactment of this Act, the rate was revised at 12% of the contract value. The Government of U.P. issued guidelines on 8 November 2017, for reimbursement of the GST to the contractor in relation to the on going contracts having regard to change in tax structure regime. The contractor would, however, have to deposit the GST at 12% of the value of the work. The applicant company submitted that despite deposit of GST from its own source, opposite parties failed to refund the applicant the tax component. The applicant filed a writ petition which was disposed on 12 September 2019 directing the respondent-competent authority to take steps for refund of admissible amount of GST to petitioner within a month. The respondent no. 1 submitted that they have released the tax component to the respondent opposite party no. 2, but said amount has not been released by the respondent no. 2, who is avoiding the compliance on one pretext or the other. The court observed that the approach adopted by the opposite party no. 2 in withholding the amount and not crediting the tax component with the applicant/company after receiving the amount from the opposite party no. 1, is not conducive. The court further observed that the matter is serious and calls for attention of the highest officer of the State.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed the Principal Secretary, PWD U.P. shall summon the officers and get the matter settled. In the event the Principal Secretary is of the opinion that the opposite party no. 2, has been unnecessarily harassing and creating impediment in releasing the amount, it will be open for the Principal Secretary to initiate proceedings including the disciplinary proceedings against the opposite party no. 2. List on 18.02.2021.