TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court upholds best judgment assessment of taxable turnover for works contract under Bihar Finance Act, 1981.</h1> <h3>Arvind Techno Engineers Private Limited Versus State of Bihar and others</h3> Arvind Techno Engineers Private Limited Versus State of Bihar and others - [2010] 31 VST 355 (Pat) Issues:Challenge to assessment orders for works contract under Bihar Finance Act, 1981.Analysis:The writ petition challenges assessment orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes for best judgment assessment of taxable turnover related to works contract within Sasaram Circle under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. The petitioner, a sub-contractor, contends that the main contractor has already paid taxes for the works contract. The petitioner failed to submit returns before the assessing officer, except for one quarter. The assessing officer provided multiple opportunities for the petitioner to present supporting documents, but the petitioner did not comply, leading to a best judgment assessment due to the lack of material. The petitioner's attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the main contractor was unsuccessful, as there was no evidence of the main contractor's tax payments. The court found that the assessing officer acted fairly and cautiously, and the petitioner's failure to provide necessary information led to the assessment. The court upheld the assessing officer's conclusions, emphasizing that it cannot delve into factual determinations in a writ jurisdiction.The petitioner's reliance on judgments prohibiting double taxation in works contracts was dismissed by the court. The court noted that while double taxation is impermissible, it is possible for the sub-contractor to bear the entire tax liability as per the contract terms. Since the petitioner failed to present a case before the assessing officer, the cited judgments were deemed inapplicable. The court highlighted that the assessing officer's conclusions were not grossly unjust or arbitrary, and the petitioner's attempt to challenge the assessment based on irrelevant materials was rejected. Ultimately, the court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it without costs.
TaxTMI 