The Court is not satisfied that any new ground has been made out requiring the Court to revisit its judgment in Harish Chandra Majhi. Consequently, the Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned petition.
Works contract— In the instant case, petitioner prayed that why the action and decision of the Opp.parties shall not be declared illegal, unconstitutional and violative of legal right of the petitioner on account of the Taxes being shared and borne by the petitioner on post enactment goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, thereby infringing the GST.
It is also prayed that why the Opp.party shall not be directed to prepare a fresh schedule of rates considering rapidly change of rate and price and calculate the differential amount of GST on the contract in which estimate was prepared under VAT.
Held that— the Court finds that the Court has dealt with a large number of grounds which are more or less similar to the points urged in the present petition. The Court is not satisfied that any new ground has been made out requiring the Court to revisit its judgment in Harish Chandra Majhi (supra) 37 TAXLOK.COM 010. Consequently, the Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned petition. It is dismissed for the reasons already stated in Harish Chandra Majhi (supra) 37 TAXLOK.COM 010.
The Court is not satisfied that any new ground has been made out requiring the Court to revisit its judgment in Harish Chandra Majhi. Consequently, the Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned petition.
Works contract— In the instant case, petitioner prayed that why the action and decision of the Opp.parties shall not be declared illegal, unconstitutional and violative of legal right of the petitioner on account of the Taxes being shared and borne by the petitioner on post enactment goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, thereby infringing the GST.
It is also prayed that why the Opp.party shall not be directed to prepare a fresh schedule of rates considering rapidly change of rate and price and calculate the differential amount of GST on the contract in which estimate was prepared under VAT.
Held that— the Court finds that the Court has dealt with a large number of grounds which are more or less similar to the points urged in the present petition. The Court is not satisfied that any new ground has been made out requiring the Court to revisit its judgment in Harish Chandra Majhi (supra) 37 TAXLOK.COM 010. Consequently, the Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned petition. It is dismissed for the reasons already stated in Harish Chandra Majhi (supra) 37 TAXLOK.COM 010.