https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769266 The Andhra Pradesh HC held that Rule 18(3)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh VAT Rules could not be used to deny refund or forfeit excess tax collected from a dealer executing a works contract for the Central Government through Indian Railways. Section 22(3) applies to works contracts for the Central Government, State Government and specified bodies, while Section 22(3-A), read with the definition of Government, is confined to the State Government and local authority. Because Rule 18(3) is tied to tax collected under Section 22(3-A), its forfeiture mechanism could not be extended to Central Government contracts. The dealer was entitled to refund of the excess amount with interest. en-us Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Apr 2025 09:09:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769266 The Andhra Pradesh HC held that Rule 18(3)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh VAT Rules could not be used to deny refund or forfeit excess tax collected from a dealer executing a works contract for the Central Government through Indian Railways. Section 22(3) applies to works contracts for the Central Government, State Government and specified bodies, while Section 22(3-A), read with the definition of Government, is confined to the State Government and local authority. Because Rule 18(3) is tied to tax collected under Section 22(3-A), its forfeiture mechanism could not be extended to Central Government contracts. The dealer was entitled to refund of the excess amount with interest. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769266