9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt 'the VAT Act'), was involved in the business of supplying services of works contract to the South Central Railway. 3. The 3rd respondent herein had passed an order of assessment, dated 09.08.2017, in relation to the tax period from June 2014 to September 2016. The 3rd respondent had held that the petitioner had a total excess tax credit of Rs. 20,19,710/- after payment of all taxes due from the petitioner. 4. The petitioner had applied for refund of the aforesaid excess tax credit of Rs. 20,19,710/-. This application came to be dismissed by the 3rd respondent by endorsement, dated 30.10.2023. Aggrieved by the said order of rejection, the petitioner has approached this Court. 5. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit in which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... them to a dealer in respect of works contract executed for them, an amount calculated at such rate as may be prescribed and such contractee deducting tax at source shall remit such amount in the manner prescribed." Provided further that no deduction shall be made from any amounts paid as consideration to any subcontractor if tax was already deducted by the contractee. (3-A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3), in the case of a dealer, executing works contract for Government or Local Authority, wherever tax at the rate of 4% is added separately to the estimated value of the contract, such tax shall be collected by the contractee and remitted in the manner as may be prescribed. 9. Rule 18 (3) of the VAT Rules, 2005 re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Section 22 (3), the provisions of Section 22 (3-A) would be applicable only to the Government of A.P., or any local authority. It would not be applicable to the Central Government. 13. The State is relying upon the provisions of Rule 18 (3) (b) to contend that any payments made in excess of tax liability of the dealer, by a Government authority, can be forfeited under Rule 18 (3) (b). 14. A closer look at Rule 18 would show that the said Rule specifically stipulates that it would be applicable for payments made under Section 22 (3-A). As the Central Government is not covered under Section 22 (3-A), the provisions of Rule 18 (3) would not be applicable. Consequently, the State cannot refuse refund of amounts to the credit of the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
