Appellant denied TDS set-off for main contractor where Form VAT 156 issued; may pursue remedies for forfeited refund The SC declined to interfere with the HC's ruling that the appellant is not entitled to set off TDS deducted in respect of the main contractor for which ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appellant denied TDS set-off for main contractor where Form VAT 156 issued; may pursue remedies for forfeited refund
The SC declined to interfere with the HC's ruling that the appellant is not entitled to set off TDS deducted in respect of the main contractor for which Form VAT 156 was issued. The Court left intact the HC decision and noted that if the appellant is aggrieved by denial of a refund of the forfeited amount under the impugned order, it may pursue appropriate remedies. The special leave petition and all pending applications were disposed of.
Delay in filing was "condoned." The Court stated it "are not inclined to interfere" with the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's claim for refund of the forfeited amount. The Court recorded that, if the petitioner remains aggrieved by the rejection of its refund claim under the impugned order, the petitioner "may seek appropriate remedies against such order, if so advised." The special leave petition and all pending applications were "disposed of" in those terms. The decision thus declines substantive intervention while leaving open the petitioner's right to pursue alternative remedial proceedings against the impugned order.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
