TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... puted question of fact. The claim of the Petitioner ultimately, in simple terms, is one for money which it seeks as reimbursement from the Opposite Parties. It is not possible for this Court in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to calculate on a case to case basis which component of the work executed by the Petitioner for reimbursement on account of GST and which is not. This being a disputed question of fact, the Court declines to undertake this exercise in the writ jurisdiction and leaves it to the Petitioner to seek other appropriate remedies available to him in accordance with law. In such proceedings it would be open to either of the parties to rely on the pleadings of the present petition. In a case being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms of the order passed by the Hon ble High Court under Annexure-3. 3. It is the case of the Petitioner, works contractor, that having been awarded the work Special Repair to N.H.-143 from K.M. 0/00 to K.M. 125/800 , he executed agreement bearing No. 05 P1 of 2017-18 with Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, Rourkela. The Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, Rourkela has issued a letter No.896-W/E, dated 29th August, 2017 vide Annexure-1 which is to the following effect:- In pursuance to having entered into a contract with this Division for the above noted work under Agreement No.05 Pt of 2017-18, dtd.29.08.2017 for an amount of Rs.1,28,62,942.001 the site of work is hereby handed over to you for execution. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its bills in respect of works executed after 01.07.2017. This leads to additional burden of tax to be borne by the petitioner. 5. Per contra, counsel for the Opposite Parties argued that the writ petition challenging the vires of Office Memorandum dated 1st July, 2017 is not maintainable inasmuch as the same has been revised by issue of Office Memorandum bearing No.38535-FIN-CT1-TAX-0045-2017/F., dated 10.12.2018. It is submitted that very many works contractors on the introduction of the CGST/OGST Act with effect from 01.07.2017 challenged Office Memorandum bearing No.36116-FIN-CT1-TAX-0045-2017/F., dated 07.12.2017. During the pendency of the writ petitions, the Government of Odisha in Finance Department brought out Revised Guidelines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed as Harish Chandra Majhi Vrs. State of Odisha and others, 2021 SCC OnLine Ori 643 = (2021) 51 GSTL 113 = (2021) 93 GSTR 354 (Ori)] by observing thus: 1. The Office Memorandum dated 10 December, 2018 of the Finance Department under Annexure- 3 prescribing guidelines for the implementation of GST (Goods and Services Tax) in works contract in post-GST regime with effect from 1 July, 2017, the Revised Schedule of Rates-2014 (Revised SoR- 2014) under Annexure-8 and the demand notice issued under Section 61 of the Odisha Goods and Services Act (OGST Act) has been questioned in the present writ petition and connected batch of cases. The prayers in the present petition read as under: i. why the action and decision of the Opp. Parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lent during pre-GST period. As such, the revised SoR-2014 was issued on 16 September, 2017. 12. The Petitioner complains that the procedure adopted in the preparation of the revised SoR- 2014 dated 16 September, 2017 (Annexure-8) is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Odisha Public Works Department Code (OPWD Code) and that the rates have not been determined on the basis of actual rates prevailing in different areas of the State. 13. The said submission of the Petitioner is not found acceptable because the rates of materials are to be maintained uniformly all over the State. Further, if there is any difference in the actual rate and scheduled rate in any particular area, the Petitioner could submit the same to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Code Revision Committee and after verification of tax rate in the pre-GST period of each of the items including the hire charges of machineries. *** 29. In the instant case, three components of the tax, i.e., subject of tax, person liable to pay the tax and rate of tax has been clearly defined in the statute. The OM dated 10th December, 2018 only prescribes the manner/procedure of calculation to determine the amount of tax in a particular eventuality in the transitional period of migration to GST Act with effect from 1st July, 2017. Consequently, the Court finds no merit in the Petitioner s challenge to the said OM in law. 6. As this Court taking note of subsequent development has already set at rest the issues raised in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
