Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, U.P., LUCKNOW versus S/S NORTHERN COAL FIELD LTD. SONEBHADRA

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow v. S/S Northern Coal Field Ltd. Sonebhadra - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 886 of 2001 [2007] RD-AH 6172 (4 April 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Present revision under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ''Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 27.03.2001 relating to the assessment year 1989-90.

The applicant is a Government of India undertaking.  It appears that for the construction of building etc., the opposite party had engaged certain contractors and as per the agreement, supplied Cement etc. to such contractors and while making the payment, deducted the value of the goods.  Such Cement was purchased by the opposite party against Form 3-D.  The Assessing Authority treated the supply of such Cement to the Contractors as a sale and raised the demand under Section 3-G (3) of the Act on the ground that the opposite party had sold the Cement.  Matter went to the Tribunal.  The Tribunal by the impugned order, held that the supply of such Cement was not the sale and the provisions of Section 3-G (3) of the Act was not applicable.

Heard Sri Nimai Das, learned Standing Counsel and Sri S. M. Dayal, learned Counsel for the opposite party.

Learned Standing Counsel submitted that in the cases of  N. M. Goel and Company Vs. CST reported in 1990 UPTC page 865, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. Vs.  State of A. P. reported in JT 2002 (2) SC, 493 and Karya Palak Engineer Vs. Rajasthan Taxation Board, Ajmir and others reported in 2004 UPTC 1178, the Apex Court held the supply of materials to the Contractors as a sale.  In view of the decision of Apex Court, the order of the Tribunal is not sustainable.

In the result, revision is allowed.  Order of the Tribunal is set aside.

Dt:04.04.2007.

MZ/886/01.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.