Decided 2 June 2026. The Meghalaya High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition by Jorabat Shillong Expressway against a GST demand on annuity payments received from NHAI for a BOT (Annuity) highway project. Because the dispute turns on interpretation of exemption notifications and adjudicatory findings, the Court sent the company to the statutory appeal.
Case at a glance
| Case | M/s Jorabat Shillong Expressway Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. |
| Forum | Meghalaya High Court (Justice H.S. Thangkhiew and Justice B. Bhattacharjee) |
| Case No. | WP(C) No. 245 of 2024 |
| Date of decision | 2 June 2026 |
| Project | Four-laning of 61.98 km Jorabat-Shillong section of NH-40, BOT (Annuity), Concession Agreement dated 16.07.2010 |
| Result | Writ dismissed; liberty to appeal within four weeks |
Facts of the case
NHAI awarded the four-laning of the Jorabat-Shillong section of NH-40 on BOT (Annuity) basis. The petitioner, a special purpose company, signed a 20-year concession agreement in 2010.
DGGI and CGST authorities demanded GST on the annuity received. The petitioner relied on the exemption for annuity and the Karnataka High Court ruling quashing the 2021 circular.
Issue before the High Court
Should the High Court decide the taxability of annuity in writ jurisdiction when an appeal is available?
What the High Court held
- None of the Whirlpool exceptions applied: no breach of natural justice and no patent lack of jurisdiction was shown.
- The challenge concerned adjudicatory findings and the reading of exemption notifications, which the appellate authority can examine.
- Circulars bind officers, not courts. Accepting that a circular 'predetermines' the outcome would allow every case involving a circular to bypass appeals.
- The writ was dismissed, but as the petitioner had acted bona fide, it was allowed to appeal under section 107 within four weeks, to be decided on merits.
Practical takeaways for taxpayers
- Concessionaires should file statutory appeals against annuity demands in time, while relying on the Karnataka High Court ruling (DPJ Bidar-Chincholi) on merits.
- A writ is more likely to succeed when a circular itself is challenged as contrary to a notification, as in Karnataka, than when an adjudication order is challenged.
- Note the four-week window given by the Court.
Frequently asked questions
Is annuity for road construction exempt from GST?
The Karnataka High Court held the exemption covers the entire annuity. The Meghalaya High Court did not decide the issue and left it to the appellate authority.
Why was the writ dismissed?
Because an efficacious appeal under section 107 was available and no exceptional ground was shown.
Facing a similar GST dispute?
GST Folio prepares replies to show cause notices, appeals before the Appellate Authority and GSTAT, refund claims and ITC reconciliations for businesses across India. Call or WhatsApp +91 80513 31315 or email gstfolio@zohomail.in.
This summary is based on the order of the Meghalaya High Court in WP(C) No. 245 of 2024. It is general information, not legal advice; the outcome of any case depends on its own facts and the full text of the order.