JUDGMENT

C.A.V. on 26.04.2023 Pronounced on 26/07/2023

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Since issue is common in all these writ applications and pertains to the same Assessee; as such, all are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

In all these writ applications the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: (a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction,

declaring the action of the Respondent in withholding amount of GST impact while paying bills from the month of September, 2019, as manifestly arbitrary, violative of the doctrine of promissory estoppel and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India;

(b) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring that being satisfied and in view of introduction of GST during the continuance of the ongoing Contract, the liability to pay GST shall be that of the Respondents in terms of the amended work order incorporating the impact of GST and as such, the Respondents be directed to forthwith pay withheld amount from various bills of the petitioner since September, 2019. (c)

For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, holding and declaring that in view of the amended Work Order incorporating the impact of GST, read with the Bid document, the Petitioner is entitled for impact of GST along with interest from September, 2019 onwards, since the GST liability has been discharged by the Petitioner out of its own pocket and can be viewed on the State GST Portal which has been illegally withheld by the Respondents from September, 2019 onwards, thus, doubly penalizing the petitioner i.e., on one hand, the petitioner is regularly depositing the GST amount as a statutory requirement and on other hand, the Respondent is withholding on ad-hoc basis the GST from Petitioner’s tax invoice.

(d) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, holding and declaring that the Petitioner is entitled for reimbursement of GST due to the fact that Respondent have deposited TDS on CGST and SGST @ 1% each of gross value of GST invoice from the date of applicability i.e. from 01/09/2018.

3. The petitioner had preferred above referred four separate writ applications. However, since the issue is common; hence the facts enumerated in W.P.(T) No. 4885 of 2022 has been made the basis for the entire factual narration . The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. A tender was floated by the Respondent no. 2-Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (JBVNL) for the electrification of rural areas, which was to be implemented in terms of a scheme floated by the Central Government namely Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gramin Jyoti Yojna (DDUGJY). The scheme was such that 60% of the project was to be funded by Rural Electrification Corporation Limited (REC), 30% of the sanctioned cost was to be funded as loan by the Project Implementing Agency (PIA/licensee) and 10% is to be funded by the respective State Governments across the nation. Before enactment of Good & Services Tax Act, the licensee floated Notice Inviting Tender and in which a pre-bid meeting was carried out, wherein the intending bidders raised query related to Clause 10.7 & Clause 31 of the General Condition of Contract.

4. For brevity, the Original Clause 10.7 and Clause 31 are hereto quoted for ready reference:

“For the purpose of the Contract, it is agreed that the Contract Price specified in Article 2 (Contract Price and Terms of Payment) of the Contract Agreement is based on the taxes, duties, levies and charges prevailing at the date seven (07) days prior to the last date of bid submission hereinafter called "Tax" in this GCC Sub-clause 10.7). If any rates of Tax are increased or decreased, a new Tax is introduced, an existing Tax is abolished, or any change in interpretation or application of any Tax occurs in the course of the performance of the Contract, which was or will be assess