Elaborating the aforesaid arguments, it was submitted that under the VAT Regime, tax paid was of the following three components, namely:- (i) Input Tax; (ii) Tax deducted as TDS; and (iii) Entry Tax. It was contended that since tax paid under the VAT Act included all the aforesaid three components, the legislature in its wisdom deliberately used the term ‘credit of amount of Value Added Tax and Entry Tax’ in Section 140 of JGST Act which cannot be restricted by subordinate legislation i.e. Rule 117. In alternative, it was further contended that even if for the sake of arguments, it is presumed that Section 140 read with Rule 117 only provide for migration of the amount of ITC, then also unadjusted TDS deducted was all along treated as the amount equivalent to Input Tax Credit and, thus, the Petitioners are even otherwise entitled to migrate the amount of TDS in its electronic credit ledger under the GST Regime. 10. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel while inviting our attention to the statutory format of monthly return being Form JVAT 200 under the JVAT Rules have demonstrated before us that unadjusted TDS amount was only allowed to be carried forward in the subsequent period under Column 61 under the heading ‘Excess Input Tax Credit’. It was contended that under the JVAT Act and its corresponding rules in the statutory form, there was no format of separately carrying forward unadjusted TDS amount, and, all along the unadjusted TDS amount was treated as Excess Input Tax Credit. Even for the period ending 30th June, 2017, the Petitioners-Assessess were having excess unadjusted TDS amount in the quarterly return filed by them. The said amount was allowed to be carried forward as Excess ITC. Thus, it was contended that on one hand, the Respondents all along treated unadjusted TDS amount as equivalent to Excess ITC amount in the statutory format of return, whereas on the other hand, Respondentauthorities are denying migration of unadjusted TDS amount by contending, inter alia, that only Excess ITC amount was allowed to be migrated which is self-contradictory. Reliance was also placed upon the provisions of Section 52 of the JVAT Act to contend, inter alia, that Petitioners were entitled to claim refund of excess tax paid including refund of Excess ITC. It was vehemently submitted that unadjusted TDS amount in the returns were
