9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e State respondents. 2. Prayers made in the writ petition are as follows: "In the premise aforesaid it is prayed that your Lordship may be pleased to issue RULE NISI calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why: a) a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction, order should not be issued for quashing the order of assessment dated 23.11.2016 (Annexure P-13) passed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Agartala as the same suffers from an inherent jurisdictional error; AND b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ and/or order should not be issued directing the respondents not to levy VAT tax on goods reckoned in the impugned order which have already suffered the Central Sales Tax; AND c) pass such other further order as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xecution of works contract." 4. The reply of the State as reflected in the counter affidavit in paragraph-7 was as follows: "7. That with regard to the statements made in paragraph-2 of the petition, the deponent denies the same. The deponent begs to state that the tax which has been levied is within the jurisdiction of the Assessing Authority, as VAT is levied on works contract as per procedure of law. No tax has been levied only on the tax paid goods which were purchased in the course of interstate sale and as projected by the petitioner. The Assessing Authority is within its jurisdiction to levy tax on 'deemed sales' under Section 4 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 which is a tax on transfer of property in goods (whether as go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsonance with the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court (Agartala Bench) nor in consonance with the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Builders Association case (supra). 5. It is well settled in law as noted hereinabove that transactions under the CST Act 'C' forms which were provided by the purchaser (NEEPCO) ought to be deleted from the taxable turnover under the TVAT Act. In other words, all transactions under the CST Act ought to have been deleted apart from deletion as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Builders Association case (supra). Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that there is no further necessity to go into the arguments advanced by the learned counsel of both sides and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
