The court affirmed that GST applies to invoices raised on or after 01.07.2017, establishing tax liability based on invoice timing rather than contract dates.

JUDGMENT :

The instant batch of seven writ petition are taken up for disposal by this common judgment and order taking into account the issues involved are common in nature. The first issue involved is as to whether the deduction of tax in respect to the petitioners should be made in term with the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, ‘the Act of 2003’) or under the Assam Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the Act of 2017’) taking into account that though the petitioners were awarded the contracts prior to coming into effect of the Act of 2017, but the bills as well as the payments were made post coming into effect the Act of 2017. Incidentally, on the basis of the said Issue, another question which would be required to be adjudicated is as to whether the petitioners would be liable for payment of GST in respect to the Invoices and payments raised and received post the coming into effect the Act of 2017. The second question arises only of the first question is decided against the petitioners which is if the petitioners are liable to pay GST would they have a right to claim the additional tax in the form of GST from the respondent authorities.

2. Before deciding the issues, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the brief facts involved in the instant batch of writ petitions:-

WP(C) No.4201/2020

3. The petitioner herein is a Class 1A contractor under PWD (Roads) Division. A Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was issued by the respondent No.3, i.e. the Chief Engineer, PWD (R) dated 26.12.2016 for construction of roads from DMB Hill Road to Bhuban Nagar via Panichaki Khasia Punjee including 2 nos. of RCC bridge (Ch.0.00 m to 1000.00 m) under RIDF-XXII of NABARD under PWD, Silchar Rural Road Division for the year 2016-17, Package No.Cachar/RIDF-XXII/07 at a Bid price of Rs.3,04,13,271.00p. The said NIT when issued, the Act of 2003 was in effect. The petitioner submitted his bid along with others and while submitting his bid, the petitioner added existing rate of 5% VAT in his quotation. After the evaluation of all bids which includes financial bids, the respondent No.3 accepted and approved the bid of the petitioner at a Bid value of Rs.3,04,13,271.00p. Thereupon, the administrative approval was affirmed through sanctioning order No.RBPC/97/2016/Pt-III/27 dated 11.04.2017 with certain conditions. The petitioner claim that one of the conditions for deduction of Tax is under the Act of 2003 which stipulated that Tax admissible under the Act of 2003 would be deducted and deposited into to Government account through Treasury Challan as per Rule. Thereupon, an agreement was entered into by and between the respondent No.3 with the petitioner and on 19.08.2017, the work order was issued. The petitioner after receipt of the work order dated 19.08.2017 started work as per work schedule and employed his men and machinery for completion of the awarded works under the agreement. It is also seen from the materials on record that the Central Government issued notification dated 22.08.2017 for imposition Goods and Services Tax Act by notifying that 6% of the tax is leviable by the Central Government towards works contract and the State Government is also empowered to levy 6% tax towards contract works. Therefore, total 12% tax was imposed. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent authority released the running account bills by deducting 12% GST under the Act of 2017 instead of 5% as per the Act of 2003. The petitioner raised objection against such deduction of tax under the Act of 2017 instead of tax under the Act of 2003 but the respondent authorities rejected such objections for which the instant writ petition was filed. At paragraph No.9 of the writ petition, the petitioner specifically mentions that by deducting 12% GST from the bills an additional amount of Rs.15,32,126.00 had been deducted from the bills of the petitioner.

4. The reliefs sought in the writ petition is also relevant to take note of in as much as