SUDHA CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. I.T.I LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records comprised in Ref: - SR/Proj/CHE/Cable -Cont/ dated 29.11.2011 on the file of the first respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to release all the payments due to the petitioner for executing the works in favour of the first respondent to the tune of Rs.67 lakhs, along with suitable interest .

(2.) According to the petitioner, they are carrying on cable laying works to various parties, including the first respondent. By letter of Indent dated 17.11.2005, the first respondent was awarded a letter of Indent for upgradation/rehabilitation of external plant net work of Chennai Telephones. The value of the work was estimated at Rs.1.92 crores with a plus or minus variation of 25% and the stipulated contract period was one year. The scope of work was in the nature of cable laying and rehabilitation of external plant in St. Thomas Mount and Chrompet of South Area of BSNL, Chennai Telephones. In otherwords, the first respondent had received orders from BSNL and in turn, has sub contracted the same to the petitioner on a back to back basis. By letter dated 06.02.2006, the petitioner brought to the notice of the first respondent about the amendment carried out in the Finance Act, 2005 with effect from 16.6.2005 by stating that the services carried out by the petitioner for the first respondent pursuant to the letter of Indent dated 17.11.2005 is liable to service tax. While presenting the rates, the petitioner had not anticipated service tax imposition and now that, the first respondent has to bear the service tax burden, being the indirect tax levy, which can be passed on to the first respondent.

(3.) The petitioner has been remitting service tax to the third respondent on all its activities, including the scope of services rendered to the first respondent, by virtue of letter of Indent dated 17.11.2005. The entire Service Tax was paid by the petitioner and are yet to be reimbursed or recovered from the first respondent.