https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167814 Section 69(2) of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and rule 39(1) of the Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 were upheld because the requirement that a contractor produce documentary proof of tax payment by the sub-contractor, along with a declaration, was treated as a valid procedural safeguard to prevent double taxation on the same works-contract turnover. The absence of a prescribed declaration format did not invalidate the scheme, as relevant particulars could still be furnished. The reassessment challenge was not entertained in writ jurisdiction because the objections turned on factual and legal matters suited to the statutory appeal remedy, and article 226 interference was declined where an efficacious alternative remedy was available. en-us Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2015 18:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167814 Section 69(2) of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and rule 39(1) of the Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 were upheld because the requirement that a contractor produce documentary proof of tax payment by the sub-contractor, along with a declaration, was treated as a valid procedural safeguard to prevent double taxation on the same works-contract turnover. The absence of a prescribed declaration format did not invalidate the scheme, as relevant particulars could still be furnished. The reassessment challenge was not entertained in writ jurisdiction because the objections turned on factual and legal matters suited to the statutory appeal remedy, and article 226 interference was declined where an efficacious alternative remedy was available. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167814