2022 (1) TMI 10

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ved by the assessment order, dated 17.11.2021 passed by respondent no.1, by which excess TDS of Rs. 4,27,60,806/- has been forfeited by invoking Section 22(3-A) read with Rule 18 (3) (b) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said assessment order is erroneous and patently illegal. It was contended that the forfeiture has been made on the ground that the petitioner had collected the tax while being paid for the works done by it in a contract with the Government to which it was not entitled. Learned counsel submitted that the works done by it were under EPC contract in which there is no estimation of work and thus, there cannot be any....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Filtrco & Anr vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh and Another [1986 SCR (1) 239] and submitted that under similar circumstances, when the High Court had refused to entertain the writ petition, it was observed that the High Court should have examined the merits of the case instead of dismissing the writ petition in limini. For the same proposition, learned counsel also relied on the judgment in M/s.Jaiprakash Associates Limited V. Superintending Engineer [2014 (2) ALD 394]. 4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader, Commercial Tax-II, submitted that from the impugned assessment order dated 17.11.2021 itself, it is clear that each and every component has been separa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat since in the present case none of the four conditions are satisfied, the petitioner be relegated to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi. 5. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court, for the present, is not inclined to interfere, primarily on account of the factual aspects which, in the considered opinion of the Court, Appellate the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupathi is more equipped to go into as it would require going through documents and even taking of evidence. Moreover, since the statute itself provides for an appellate forum, the same is meant for giving opportunity to the aggrieved person to have departmental remedy before invoking ju....