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Your email address will not be published.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
Rectification Under Section 161 Must Be Considered Before Action on SCN | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 7, 2025

Statutory Interest on Delayed GST Refund Payable from Original Application Date | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 6, 2025

Writ Against Section 74 Consolidated GST Order Not Maintainable | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 5, 2025

HC Quashes GST Demand Order for Denial of Hearing | Fresh Notice Directed

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 4, 2025

Recovery During GST Search Without SCN Held Illegal—Refund with Interest Ordered | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

November 4, 2025

Copy of CGST (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2025

GST • News • Statutory Scope

November 3, 2025

GSTN Launches ‘Import of Goods’ Module in IMS from Oct 2025

GST • News • Statutory Scope

November 1, 2025

GSTN Bars Filing of GST Returns Beyond 3 Years From Due Date

GST • News • Statutory Scope

October 31, 2025

CBIC Defines Officer Jurisdiction and Monetary Limits for SCNs and Orders Under CGST Act

GST • News • Statutory Scope

October 30, 2025

HC Quashes ITC Demand Order Passed Without Hearing After GST Cancellation

GST • News • Case Chronicles

October 29, 2025