Coimbatore Corporation Contractors Welfare Association Versus State of Tamil Nadu, The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Water Supply & Drainage Board, The Executive Director Tamil Nadu Water Supply & Drainage Board, The Chief Engineer Tamil Nadu Water Supply & Drainage Board and The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes – 2018 (3) TMI 968 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – [2017] 1 GSTL 6 (Mad), [2018] 2 GSTL 21 (Mad) – Consideration of representations submitted by the petitioner – Levy of GST – Works Contract, on which VAT was imposed previously – the petitioner/association made representations on 05.07.2017, 10.07.2017, 11.07.2017 and 11.09.2017 to the respondents stating that the contract works for which the agreements were executed prior to 01.07.2017 GST cannot be imposed and 2% VAT alone is applicable.
–
Held that: – since the petitioner's representations are pending, it is appropriate for the respondent to respond to the same by giving them a reply. The appropriate person who would be in a positi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nt and other Governmental organisation. 2. The contractors used to remit 2% tax on value for the works executed by them towards the Works Contract Tax under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006 [hereinafter called as the TNVAT ] in terms of Section 6 of the TNVAT Act. 3. After the enactment of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 with effect from 01.07.2017, certain problems have arisen, which has compelled the petitioner to submit representations to the respondent. 4. The petitioner would state that on 22.08.2017, the Central Government issued notification notifying that 6% of the tax is leviable by the Central Government towards Works Contract. 5. The State Government is empowered to levy towards works contract tax in addition to the works contract tax imposed by the Central Government. Therefore, the contractor would be liable to pay 12% of tax towards works contract. 6. Therefore, the petitioner/association made representations on 05.07.2017, 10.07.2017, 11.07.2017 and 11.0
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ch, it is seen that the Government also is in the process of discussing as to how the modality has to be worked out and what is the relief petitioner/ association entitled to. 10. In any event, since the petitioner's representations are pending, it is appropriate for the respondent to respond to the same by giving them a reply. The appropriate person who would be in a position to give reply is that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes shall give a reply. Because all other authorities are the department of Highways and National Highways etc., who would not be in a position to specifically address the issue pointed out by the petitioner. 11. The learned Government Advocate has drawn the attention of this Court to G.O. Ms.No.264, Finance [Salaries] Department, dated 15.09.2017. The operative portion of the Government Order reads as follows :- 5.Under the new tax regime, GST (comprising CGST, SGST and IGST) on works contracts for Government work was intially notified at 18 percent. Thi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =