TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether deduction of tax at source from payments made to works contractors under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could be made on a basis divorced from the dealer's tentative tax liability; and whether the rule governing lower or nil deduction certificates was inconsistent with the Act.
Analysis: Deduction at source under section 47 was treated as a machinery provision linked to the charging scheme and could not operate independently of the dealer's tentative tax liability. The authority making the deduction was required to determine taxable turnover in a tentative manner according to law and not mechanically on the gross value of the bill. The statutory scheme, as read down, did not permit recovery of an amount exceeding what could be lawfully due, and any excess deduction had to be adjusted through assessment and refund. The Rules were found capable of being read consistently with the statute, and the provision for granting lower liability or nil liability certificates with reference to running bills was not shown to be contrary to the Act.
Conclusion: Deduction at source must be made only on the basis of taxable turnover and tentative tax liability determined in accordance with law, after considering the dealer's viewpoint. If there is dispute, assessment should follow expeditiously, and any excess deduction must be refunded promptly. The challenge to the lower deduction mechanism was not accepted.
Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were disposed of with directions regulating deduction, assessment, and refund so that tax is recovered only to the extent lawfully due.
TaxTMI 
