Government Entity Was Directed to Pay Differential Amount, Despite Pending State Approval as GST Rate Increased From 12% to 18% | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

GST liability on government contracts
Case Details: SKB Projects India Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) 28 Centax 152 (M.P.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari & Avanindra Kumar Singh, JJ.
  • Shri Akshay Khandelwal, Adv. for the Petitioner.
  • Shri Abhijit Awasthi, Deputy Adv. General for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a construction company, was awarded a contract for the construction and renovation of Government New Law College, Indore, pursuant to work orders issued by the respondent, a government entity classified as a ‘Government Entity’ under the GST Act, 2017. Subsequently, the rate of GST applicable to construction services was increased from 12% to 18% through a statutory notification. Notwithstanding this revision, the respondent continued to process payments at the earlier rate of 12%, whereas the petitioner remained obligated to discharge GST at the revised rate of 18%. Although the respondent formally acknowledged its liability to pay the additional 6% GST, it withheld the payment citing the pendency of requisite approval from the State Government. Aggrieved by this inaction, the petitioner instituted a writ petition seeking appropriate relief for the release of the differential GST amount.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble High Court, relying on the precedent established in Writ Petition No. 39378 of 2024, held that the respondent was liable to discharge the differential 6% GST for the specified period, irrespective of the pending State Government approval. Accordingly, the Court directed the respondent to remit the differential amount within three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. Furthermore, in the event of non-compliance, the Court determined that the petitioner would be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date on which the entitlement arose. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed.

List of Notifications Cited

  • Notification No.24/2017 CT(R) dated 21.09.2017
  • Notification No.15/2021 CT(R) dated 18.11.2021

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
GSTN Upgrades GSTR-3B Interest and Tax Reporting from Jan 2026

GST • News • Statutory Scope

February 1, 2026

Common Director Not Ground to Lift Corporate Veil | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 31, 2026

GST Appeal Allowed Despite Delay Due to Illness | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

HC Orders Reconsideration of Excess ITC Denial on Imports

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

Bail Granted After Prolonged Custody Before Trial | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 29, 2026

Refund Cannot Be Rejected After Eligibility Accepted | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 28, 2026

GSTN Advisory On RSP Based Valuation Of Tobacco Under GST

GST • News • Statutory Scope

January 27, 2026

Writ Not Maintainable Against SCN Under GST | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 24, 2026

Writ Not Maintainable Against SCN Under Section 74 | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 23, 2026

Refund Of Statutory Pre-Deposit Becomes Vested Right | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 22, 2026