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Your email address will not be published.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 Advisory | Dropdown HSN & Mandatory Table 13 in GSTR-1 from May 2025

GST • News • Statutory Scope

May 5, 2025

CBIC Mandates Email-Based Grievance Mechanism for GST Registration

GST • News • Statutory Scope

May 5, 2025

HC Sets Aside GST Order Passed Without Considering Assessee’s Reply

GST • News • Case Chronicles

May 2, 2025

Form GST MOV-09 Notice—AP High Court Clears DTDC of Tax Liability

GST • News • Case Chronicles

May 1, 2025

HC Directs Amendment of Shipping Bill to Correct GSTIN and Enable IGST Refund

GST • News • Case Chronicles

April 30, 2025

HC Quashes GST Order Passed Without Hearing Assessee After Registration Cancellation

GST • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025

HC Orders Restoration of GST Registration if Dues Cleared and Returns Filed

GST • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025

HC Quashes GST Orders Served Only via Portal Without Proper Communication

GST • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025

CGST Compensation Cess Refund—Tata Steel vs Jharkhand | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

April 28, 2025

HC Grants Stay on Tax Recovery Subsumed Under CIRP Resolution Plan

GST • News • Case Chronicles

April 28, 2025