High Court of Karnataka4 August 2026

Naganath Constructions Engineers and Contractors v. Government of Karnataka

For assessee

WRIT PETITION NO. 106128 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

The ruling in brief

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

Provisions considered

Section 9, read with section 142, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Article 226 of Constitution of India, 1950

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

The ruling in brief

Related rulings

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 Court30 Jul 2026

For assessee

Er. Roland S. Fernandes v. Government of Karnataka

Where Class-I contractor executed pre-GST works contract for State and, due to GST implementation, incurred additional GST liability which was paid to authorities, contractor was legally entitled to reimbursement of GST-induced differential from State, as State benefitted from contract and consistent decisions require recipient to bear increased tax incidence subject to verification of claim

Naganath Constructions Engineers and Contractors v. Government of Karnataka

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Naganath Constructions Engineers and Contractors v. Government of Karnataka

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Read the full analysis

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

Anil Annasaheb Patil v. Executive Engineer Pwd

Er. Roland S. Fernandes v. Government of Karnataka

Read the full analysis