Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Calcutta HC Directs PWD to Consider Representation for Reimbursement of Differential GST [Read Order]

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the concerned authority to consider the petitioner's representations regarding the reimbursement of a 6% differential GST amount and pass a reasoned order within six weeks.

Calcutta HC Directs PWD to Consider Representation for Reimbursement of Differential GST [Read Order]
X

The Calcutta High Court has directed the Superintendent, Health Electrical Circle, PWD and other respondent authorities to consider and decide the claim of a contractor seeking refund of differential GST due to change in rate of taxes in 2022. Justice Smita Das De disposed of the writ suit brought by Indo Nabin Projects Limited and directed the authorities to hear the petitioner...


The Calcutta High Court has directed the Superintendent, Health Electrical Circle, PWD and other respondent authorities to consider and decide the claim of a contractor seeking refund of differential GST due to change in rate of taxes in 2022.

Justice Smita Das De disposed of the writ suit brought by Indo Nabin Projects Limited and directed the authorities to hear the petitioner and deliver a reasoned ruling within six weeks.

The petitioner, a contractor, was given work orders for the year 2015-16 for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of sub-stations at SSKM Hospital and Medical College & Hospital, Kolkata. The disagreement was relating to refund of differential GST of 6% in view of change in tax structure w.e.f. 18.07.2022.

The petitioner submitted that they were entitled to this differential amount and have made several representations to the department. But the claim was dismissed by a mysterious “one-line order” issued on Dec. 5, 2025.

During the course of the proceedings, it was noticed that the department had earlier issued a notice dated February 9, 2024 for recovery of the differential GST amounts which was paid by the petitioner vide DRC-03 on March 11, 2024. This payment and a number of representations were not sufficient to appropriately address the claim for reimbursement.

The bench said the issue ought to be properly considered by the appropriate authorities and not judicial interference at the admission stage.

“I direct the respondent nos. 7 to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 23.02.2024, 08.05.2024, 23.09.2024 and 28.11.2024 by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a reasoned order,” the Court directed.

Now the representations have to be decided within six weeks of the order being received.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

Indo Nabin Projects Limited & Anr vs The Superintending Engineer, Health Electrical Circle, PWD, Govt. of West Bengal & Ors , 2026 TAXSCAN (HC) 811 , WPA 11286 of 2026 , 11 June 2026 , Mr. Ankit Kanodia, Megha Agarwal, Tulika Roy. , oy Chowdhury, Ranjana Chatterjee
Indo Nabin Projects Limited & Anr vs The Superintending Engineer, Health Electrical Circle, PWD, Govt. of West Bengal & Ors
CITATION :  2026 TAXSCAN (HC) 811Case Number :  WPA 11286 of 2026Date of Judgement :  11 June 2026Coram :  Smita Das De, JCounsel of Appellant :  Mr. Ankit Kanodia, Megha Agarwal, Tulika Roy.Counsel Of Respondent :  oy Chowdhury, Ranjana Chatterjee
Next Story

Related Stories

All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019