KARNI SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a contractor, who was awarded a contract for collection of sales tax under section 77 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2003"), has approached this court by way of present writ petition being aggrieved by order dated February 1, 2010 passed by the respondent-CTO, Barmer, demanding a proportionate amount of contract amount of Rs. 67,56,546 vide annexure 8 on account of short fall of the instalment amount of contract for 253 days reducing the contractual amount of Rs. 1,58,18,000 for the period April 23, 2010 to April 22, 2011 reducing the same proportionately for 253 days for the period April 23, 2010 to December 31, 2010 to Rs. 1,09,64,258 since the petitioner-contractor paid for this period only a sum of Rs. 47,08,200 thus, the balance amount along with interest was Rs. 67,56,546 sought to be recovered by passing the said order dated February 1, 2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nikhil Dungawat, urged that the contract period was cut-short by the respondent-Department vide notification dated December 31, 2010 (annexure 5) since the casual commodities, viz., "bajri", "morum" and "kankar" were exempted from the payment of tax itself vide notification dated January 1, 2011; and therefore, there was no requirement of said check-post/tax collection centre for which the petitioner was awarded the said contract for the period up to April 22, 2011.

(2.) The said assessing authority, therefore, proceeding as per clause 12 of the contract, which is reproduced hereunder for ready reference, read with rule 44 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Rules, 2006, which are in same terms, proportionately reduced the contract amount and short-fall in the payment, was sought to be recovered with interest.

(3.) The clause 12 of the contract in pari materia with rule 44, clause (i) of the VAT Rules, reads as under: