9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 1276 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxSeeking refund of the amount paid in excess in view of the TDS deducted from the State bills of the petitioner and paid to the State Government - rejected in view of non-passing of the order of assessment orders for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2015-16, within the provisions of Section 29 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 - HELD THAT - The impugned order dated 31-8-2021 is hereby set aside. The case for the assessment year of 2010-11 to 2015-16 under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 is remanded back to the Respondent No. 3 for passing the order under Sections 29 and 43 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 after giving the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Refund of excess tax paid under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2015-16. Analysis: The petitioner, a registered dealer under the previous Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004, worked as a contractor under ONGC. ONGC deducted tax at source on works contract value without considering various components, leading to an excess tax payment by the petitioner. Despite filing returns and applying for a refund, the authorities did not pass any assessment orders for the relevant years. The petitioner's application for refund was rejected based on non-passing of assessment orders within the Act's provisions. The petitioner argued that since a significant amount of excess tax was paid to the government, the authorities should have passed orders under Sections 29 and 43 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004. The court, considering the facts and legal provisions, set aside the impugned order dated 31-8-2021. The case for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2015-16 was remanded back to the authorities for passing orders under the relevant sections after giving the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The court directed the completion of the process within three months and granted the petitioner the liberty to challenge any subsequent order before the court if still aggrieved. Therefore, the court disposed of the petition in favor of the petitioner, directing the authorities to reconsider the refund application in accordance with the provisions of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004.
|
