Court directs petitioner to pursue statutory remedy under Assam VAT Act, denies writ petition.

The court declined to entertain the writ petition under Article 226, advising the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy under Section 47(b)(i) of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The petitioner was instructed to submit an application to the prescribed authority for determination of deductions made by the Railways, with the authority required to decide within one month. The petitioner retained the right to appeal any adverse decision. The court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to pursue the statutory remedy, with no costs awarded to either party.

---

---

Issues:
Petition for grant of relief under Article 226 of the Constitution regarding deduction of tax at source in a work contract.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought relief through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, requesting the court to restrain the respondents from deducting tax at source without considering various deductions applicable under the Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005. The court examined the provisions of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and determined that the appropriate remedy for the petitioner, a dealer, was to submit an application under Section 47(b)(i) of the Act to the prescribed authority for the determination of deductions made by the Railways from their bills. The court emphasized that the statutory remedy provided under the Act should be utilized by the dealer instead of resorting to a writ petition under Article 226. The State's counsel and petitioner's counsel did not dispute this legal proposition. Consequently, the court declined to entertain the writ petition on its merits and advised the petitioner to pursue the remedy available under Section 47(b)(i) of the Act.

The court instructed that if the petitioner submits an application to the prescribed authority, it should be decided expeditiously, preferably within one month from the date of submission. The prescribed authority must provide a reasoned order either granting or rejecting the certificate based on the facts specified in the Act. The petitioner retains the right to challenge the order in appeal as per the provisions of the Act if it is adverse. Following the appeal's outcome, the assessing authority will assess the petitioner and the concerned person accordingly. The court disposed of the writ petition with these directions, granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy under Section 47(b)(i) of the Act. The State was not required to file a response in this case, and no costs were awarded.

---