High Court of Kerala10 July 2026

D.Sureshbabu v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd

For revenue

WP (C) NO. 23893 OF 2020

The ruling in brief

Where works were completed after GST regime came into force, deduction of embedded KVAT/Service Tax from quoted contract value and levy of GST on resultant amount was valid; any dispute regarding quantification had to be resolved before appropriate forum

Provisions considered

Section 9, read with section 142, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Kerala Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Finance Act, 1994

This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.

High Court of Kerala10 July 2026

D.Sureshbabu v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd

For revenue

WP (C) NO. 23893 OF 2020

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Section 9, read with section 142, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Kerala Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Finance Act, 1994

Members

Read the full analysis

The background, the issue before the court and the reasoning behind the decision are free for members — along with the professional discussion on this ruling.

Free to join. No card required.

Already a member? Sign in

This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.

Case details

Forum: High Court of Kerala
Bench: MRS. PREETA A.K., J
Decided on: 10 Jul 2026
Case no.: WP (C) NO. 23893 OF 2020
Outcome: In favour of the revenue
Tax area: GST (MISC)
Topic: Government contractors

Karnataka High Court25 Aug 2026

For assessee

N.S. Nayak and Sons v. State of Karnataka

Where a registered civil contractor executed pre-GST works and after GST rollout paid differential GST, as State received benefit of works post-GST implementation, contractor had enforceable right thereto, thus, recipient municipal authority was liable to reimburse GST-attributable differential subject to verification

Karnataka High Court10 Aug 2026

For assessee

Anil Annasaheb Patil v. Executive Engineer Pwd

Where a contractor under a works contract faced additional tax burden due to transition from VAT to GST, having paid differential GST post-regime change, contractor acquired legal right to reimbursement from State, and State as beneficiary is obliged to reimburse the contractor to the extent of GST-attributable liability, subject to verification

Karnataka High Court4 Aug 2026

For assessee

Naganath Constructions Engineers and Contractors v. Government of Karnataka

Where civil contractor executed road works under contract with State and, following GST replacing VAT, paid differential GST due to regime change, contractor became entitled to reimbursement of additional GST from beneficiary State entity, as liability to bear such tax rests on service recipient and reimbursement right extends only to tax attributable to GST regime introduction, subject to verification and law

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Read the full analysis

Related rulings

N.S. Nayak and Sons v. State of Karnataka

Anil Annasaheb Patil v. Executive Engineer Pwd

Naganath Constructions Engineers and Contractors v. Government of Karnataka

Read the full analysis