https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166448 Section 11(2)(c) of the Orissa VAT Act, read with rule 6(e), was treated as unworkable for works contracts because the Rules provided only labour and service deductions and omitted other like charges recognised in the law on taxable turnover. The analysis applies Gannon Dunkerley and the binding effect of Supreme Court law under Article 141, stressing that a tax measure must be certain and the deductible base must be clearly ascertainable. On that reasoning, the provision was considered unworkable to the extent it failed to capture the full deduction scheme required for works contracts, and the recognised deductions were to be applied until the Rules were amended. en-us Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166448 Section 11(2)(c) of the Orissa VAT Act, read with rule 6(e), was treated as unworkable for works contracts because the Rules provided only labour and service deductions and omitted other like charges recognised in the law on taxable turnover. The analysis applies Gannon Dunkerley and the binding effect of Supreme Court law under Article 141, stressing that a tax measure must be certain and the deductible base must be clearly ascertainable. On that reasoning, the provision was considered unworkable to the extent it failed to capture the full deduction scheme required for works contracts, and the recognised deductions were to be applied until the Rules were amended. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166448