Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 921 of 2010
and
WRIT TAX No.- 922 of 2010
Petitioner :- M/S Lucknow Sitapur Expressway Limited
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Deptt. Of Commercial Tax
Petitioner Counsel :- Chandra Kumar Rai,J.K. Mittal
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.
Hon’ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
These two writ petitions have been filed challenging the order
passed by Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax Division-3,
Noida dated 29.05.2010 pertaining to assessment years 2006-07
and 2007-08 respective enclosed as annexure no. 1 to the writ
petitions, separately.
Under the impugned orders the petitioners have been held
responsible for non-deduction and deposit of T.D.S. under Section
34 (6) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 on the
payment made towards work contract to D.S.C. Ltd., Noida. The
petitioners have also been directed to pay penalty for violation of
Section 34 (1) and 34 (6) of the Act, 2008.
The orders are being challenged before this Court basically on the
ground that the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 itself has been
enforced on 01.01.2008 while the notification for deduction and
deposit of VAT at the rate of 4% on the payments made towards
work contract under Section 34 has been issued only on
04.05.2008 which has been made effective from 4th March, 2008.
It is contended that the responsibility of deduction of T.D.S. on
payments made towards work contract (even if assumed to be
applicable in the case of the petitioner) would arise only for a
period subsequent to the enforcement of the U.P. Value Added
Tax Act, 2008 and issuance of the notification dated 04.05.2008
with effect from 4th March, 2008.
It is, submitted that neither any Value Added Tax was liable to be
deducted by the petitioner nor any penalty can be imposed for non-
deduction and non-deposit thereof.
It is, therefore, contended that the impugned order of the Deputy
Commissioner is wholly without jurisdiction. The provisions of
Value Added Tax Act, 2008 are not prospective in nature and any
transaction entered into in terms of work contract prior to the
aforesaid date and enforcement of the provision is not covered.
Having heard counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel, we
are of the opinion that the matter does require enquiry by this
Court. The applicability of Value Added Tax Act, 2008 itself is
being questioned.
Standing counsel prays for and is granted for three weeks time to
file counter affidavit.
List on 19th July, 2010 before appropriate Bench.
Till the next date of listing operation of the impugned order dated
29.05.2010, in so far as it pertains to the assessment years 2006-07
and 2007-08 shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 23.6.2010
M/A.