https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404277 Once the VAT regime had been repealed and the work was executed in the GST period, there was no legal basis to continue deducting VAT from running bills or to withhold GST reimbursement under the agreement. The contractor was liable for GST, and adjustment of VAT against the final bill, including TDS deduction from GST payable, was unjustified. Money remitted to VAT authorities for work done after GST came into force could not be retained merely because the refund request was filed beyond the limitation period under the repealed Act; collection without authority of law could be corrected in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner succeeded, and refund processing was directed. en-us Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2025 13:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404277 Once the VAT regime had been repealed and the work was executed in the GST period, there was no legal basis to continue deducting VAT from running bills or to withhold GST reimbursement under the agreement. The contractor was liable for GST, and adjustment of VAT against the final bill, including TDS deduction from GST payable, was unjustified. Money remitted to VAT authorities for work done after GST came into force could not be retained merely because the refund request was filed beyond the limitation period under the repealed Act; collection without authority of law could be corrected in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner succeeded, and refund processing was directed. Case-Laws GST Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404277