Court deems it proper to direct the respondent No.1- Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of M.P., Bhopal to decide the said representation which will be filed by the petitioner by a speaking order after providing opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date copy of this order is produced before him.
GST on Work Contract –––– The petitioners prayed for setting aside the Order dated 20.12.2020 and dispose the Representation dated 28.02.2021.The petitioner is a Partnership Firm engaged in the Civil construction activities. The petitioner had entered into various contracts for construction of PMGSY Road prior to enactment of GST and paying tax levied under the VAT regime, but after enactment of GST, the petitioner has been subjected to payment of GST, which has caused additional burden on the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner requested for GST payment on the amount of work executed after 01.07.2017 from the respondents, which request was turned down by the respondent vide impugned order dated 20.12.2020 on the ground that there is no provision in the agreement.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court, directed the respondent Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of M.P., to decide the representation which will be filed by the petitioner by a speaking order after providing opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner within a period of three months.
Court deems it proper to direct the respondent No.1- Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of M.P., Bhopal to decide the said representation which will be filed by the petitioner by a speaking order after providing opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date copy of this order is produced before him.
GST on Work Contract –––– The petitioners prayed for setting aside the Order dated 20.12.2020 and dispose the Representation dated 28.02.2021.The petitioner is a Partnership Firm engaged in the Civil construction activities. The petitioner had entered into various contracts for construction of PMGSY Road prior to enactment of GST and paying tax levied under the VAT regime, but after enactment of GST, the petitioner has been subjected to payment of GST, which has caused additional burden on the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner requested for GST payment on the amount of work executed after 01.07.2017 from the respondents, which request was turned down by the respondent vide impugned order dated 20.12.2020 on the ground that there is no provision in the agreement.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court, directed the respondent Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government of M.P., to decide the representation which will be filed by the petitioner by a speaking order after providing opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner within a period of three months.