Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DY. DIRECTOR (CONSTRUCTION) RAJYA KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI PARI. versus COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, U.P. LUCKNOW

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dy. Director (Construction) Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Pari. v. Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1684 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 659 (11 January 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

Court no. 22

Trade Tax Revision no.  1684 of 2006.

Deputy Director (Construction), Shahjahanpur.... Revisionist.

Vs

Commissioner of Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow. ... Opp. Party.

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J

Present revision under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ''Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 04.09.2006 relating to the assessment year 2001-2002.

Applicant claimed to be a Department of State of U. P. purchased Cement and Max Phalt against Form 3-D.  The aforesaid goods were supplied to the Contractors who were engaged for the construction of road of Office Building and while making the payments to the Contractors, the value of the aforesaid two items were deducted.  The Assessing Authority treated the supply of aforesaid two materials as the sale and held that the applicant had violated the provisions of Section 3-G (3) of the Act and accordingly, levied the tax on the purchases of Cement and Max Phalt.  The order of the Assessing Authority has been confirmed in first appeal as well as by the Tribunal.

Heard Sri Satish Madhyan, learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri B. K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the goods, which were supplied to the Contractors were used in the construction of applicant own building, therefore, the supply was not the sale.  Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the supply of materials by the contractee to the Contractors in case of deduction of the value of the goods while making the payments to the Contractors, has been held as the sale by the Apex Court in the case of Karya Palak Engineer, C.P.W.D., Bikaner Vs. Rajasthan Taxation Board, Ajmer and others, reported in 2004 UPTC, 1178.  

I find substance in the argument of learned Standing Counsel.

Issue involved in the present revision is squarely covered by the decision of Apex Court in the case of Karya Palak Engineer, C.P.W.D., Bikaner Vs. Rajasthan Taxation Board, Ajmer and others (supra), in which, the supply of materials by the Contractee to the Contractors for the price, has been held as the sale.

In the result, revision has no force and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dt:11.01.2007.

MZ/-


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.