IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.7425 of 2009 ====================================================== Neeraj Construction Pvt. Ltd. through its Managing Director Keshaw Prasad having its registered office at & P.S. Daudnagar, Ward No.10, District- Aurangabad (Bihar). .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, at + P.S. Dehri, District Rohtas at Sasaram. 3. The Superintending Engineer, Water Ways Circle, at & P.S.-Bhabhua, Government of Bihar, Bhabhua, District-Kaimur. 4. Executive Engineer, Dehri Division, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, at & P.S.-Dehri, District-Sasaram. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-10 with Mr. Sunil Kumar, A.C. to AAG-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3. 15-07-2011 The petitioner, a Civil Contractor has challenged the action of the respondent authorities in deducting 4 per cent of the contractual amount against the Value Added Tax payable by the petitioner. It is the claim of the petitioner that part of the contractual amount comprises the cost of the labour. Such amount Patna High Court CWJC No.7425 of 2009 (3) dt.15-07-2011 2 / 2 2 is not exigible to the Value Added Tax under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005. Nevertheless, the respondent authorities continue to deduct 4 per cent of the entire contractual amount. Learned advocates agree that the matter at issue is governed by the judgment of this Court in the matter of Abdul Majid Khan & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [2010 (3) P.L.J.R. 782], more particularly paragraphs 37 and 38 thereof. In view of the decision of this court the petitioner may pursue the remedy before the concerned authority/s. Subject to the above observation the petition is disposed of. The parties will bear their own cost. Pawan Kumar/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)