9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny exemption or for payment of such tax liability on reverse charge basis by the recipient under the scheme of the aforesaid Act. Since the work order was placed on the Petitioner s Head Office by the Fourth Respondent, it attracts tax under the provisions of the said Act only. Therefore, tax if any is payable by the Petitioner s Head Office at Hyderabad alone. The work order is outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, 2006 unless supply of goods were made from Tamil Nadu. Therefore, the Third Respondent was justified in refusing to grant certificate to the Petitioner. Fourth Respondent was also not obliged to deduct tax under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and remit the same - petition disposed off. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.2005 and 26.04.2006 under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and on 23.04.2007 under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. However, when the Petitioner approached for a similar certificate for the succeeding period, in view of the extension of the contract, the Third Respondent has refused to grant the same under the impugned order dated 28.07.2008. The operative portion of the impugned order dated 28.07.2008 of the Third Respondent reads as under:- 5. They also claim that their involvement in this contract is on labour portion and not on the supply part of the said contract. If the receipt pertains to labour portion alone the question of value added tax on their labour portion of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Per contra learned Additional Government Pleader (Tax) appearing for the Official Respondents submits that the impugned orders of the First Respondent and the Third Respondent are well reasoned and require no interference. 10. He submits that the application for exemption was earlier made by the Petitioner s local office and therefore exemption was granted. However, the contract in question has been awarded to the Head Office of the Petitioner at Hyderabad and therefore for such work orders, question of grant of Exemption Certificate under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 does not arise. He, therefore, submits that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 11. I have considered the arguments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
