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Your email address will not be published.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
GST Cancellation Set Aside Due to Vague SCN | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 21, 2025

Rule 96(10) Proceedings Quashed Post Omission | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 21, 2025

GST Portal to Enable ASP Access Alerts and Consent Revocation

GST • News • Statutory Scope

July 19, 2025

SC Sets Aside Bail as Accused Appropriated and Reprobated Terms

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 19, 2025

Goods Shed Services Taxable at 18% GST | Not Composite—AAR

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 18, 2025

GSTN Enables Appeal Filing and Appeal Restoration for SPL-07 Orders

GST • News • Statutory Scope

July 18, 2025

Revenue Must Consider IGST ITC on Branch Transfer | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 17, 2025

No GST on Assignment of Leasehold Rights in Immovable Property | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 16, 2025

HC Quashes ECL Blocking Order Passed Without Hearing

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 15, 2025

Bail Granted in Bogus Supply Tax Evasion Case | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 15, 2025