- (1.) We have heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, the learned senior counsel along with Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B.Tripathi, the learned Special Counsel for the State.
(2.) The petitioner was granted a contract by the Agra Development Authority for construction of the road from Kuberpur to Fatehabad Road under an agreement dated 2.5.2014. Under Section 34 of the U.P.VAT Act, tax at source is required to be deducted by the Agra Development Authority on the bills presented by the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner moved an application before his assessing authority, namely, the Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax, Sector 12, Meerut contending that a direction be issued to the Agra Development Authority not to deduct tax at source since the petitioner is paying the tax in its monthly return. The assessing authority of the petitioner, after considering the matter, issued an order dated 2.5.2015 allowing the application of the petitioner and directing the Agra Development Authority not to deduct the tax at the time when payments are to be made to the petitioner as per the bills raised by them. The assessing authority while passing the order was of the view that the petitioner was paying the tax at the time of his filing the monthly returns. Armed with this order, the petitioner made a request to the Agra Development Authority not to deduct the tax under Section 34 of the VAT Act. It transpires that the Agra Development Authority sought clarification from their assessing authority, namely, the Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax, Sector 16, Agra, respondent No.2, who issued the impugned order dated 23.5.2015 directing the Agra Development Authority to deduct 4% of tax on the bills raised by the petitioner. A consequential order to that effect was also passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-1, Commercial Tax, Agra Zone, Agra, respondent No.3. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, has filed the present writ petition.
(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion, that the Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax, Agra, respondent No.2 had no authority to pass the impugned order directing deduction of 4% on the bills raised by the petitioner. Once the assessing authority of the petitioner allowed the petitioner the benefit under Section 34 of the Act, no amount could be deducted by the deductor under Section 34 of the VAT Act on the bills raised by the petitioner and, therefore, the assessing authority of Agra Development Authority, could not, in law, issue such an order. On this short point, the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Agra dated 23.5.2015 and the consequential order dated 4.7.2015 issued by the Additional Commissioner, Grade -1, Commercial Tax, Agra Zone, Agra being without any authority of law are quashed.;