9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 86/- (without GST). The petitioner was permitted, in terms of the tender as well as the Sale Release Order, to cut the scrap material in pieces to facilitate loading. Relying on several e-Way Bills and receipts of payments made to weighbridges, the petitioner claims that altogether 434.659 MT of such scrap materials, out of the total of 489.659 MT, was delivered to the petitioner by February 9, 2019. The petitioner places reliance on several Requisition and Issue Notes issued by the concerned officials of the Railways, all of which indicate that the scarp material was delivered in part. The last such Note was issued on January 15, 2019, which also indicates that the delivery was made in part. 2. Relying on a Joint Note issued by the Railwa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gether with GST, TCS and interest. 4. However, in a chart filed by learned counsel for the petitioner in court, a copy of which was handed over to learned counsel for the respondents, it was indicated that, as per the receipts issued by the weighbridges, the amount of goods delivered (without tax) was worth Rs. 1,10,86,725/-. Deducting such amount from the total amount paid, that is, Rs. 1,25,15,886/-, the amount due comes to Rs. 16,29,161/-. By dividing the said due amount by the sale price as mentioned in the notice inviting tender (Rs. 25,666/- per MT), the petitioner claims that the due quantity of scrap was 63.475 MT. 5. The respondents, by both an affidavit-in-opposition and a supplementary affidavit, controverted the allegations of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 metric tons were still due from the respondents. 9. The documents annexed to the supplementary affidavit of the respondents, although relying on the Joint Note dated February 9, 2019, which itself indicates that the entire delivery was never made but some of the scrap materials were still lying on the river bed and under muddy soil, respondent no.3 stated that delivery of full quantity had been completed on February 9, 2019. Such letter is patently contradictory to the Joint Note, which is an admitted document on which both sides rely. Hence, no reliance can be placed on the internal communications annexed to the supplementary affidavit to the affidavit-in-opposition. 10. The next question which arises is, what was the quantum of undeli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t document indicating that there was a joint effort by the parties to recover the balance scrap, which failed, the respondents are liable to pay interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from that date on the said principal dues to the petitioner. As far as the claim of GST is concerned, since the total amount paid by the petitioner, being Rs. 12,56,759/-, was without GST, as indicated in the Sale Release Order annexed at page 22 of the writ petition, there is no question of awarding any amount in lieu of GST and/or TCS. Since the specific stand of both the parties is that there was no further development regarding recovery of the balance scrap material after February 9, 2019, when the Joint Note was executed, there does not arise any sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
