Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Manufacture and supply of ships subject to sales tax under Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act

        Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. Versus State of Andhra Pradesh

        Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. Versus State of Andhra Pradesh - [2000] 119 STC 533 (SC), 2000 (6) SCC 579, 2000 AIR 2411, 2000 (1) Suppl. SCR 592, 2000 (8) JT ... Issues Involved:
        1. Whether the transactions involved in the manufacture and supply of ships by the appellant to its customers are a 'sale' as defined in clause (n) of section 2 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, or a 'works contract' as defined in clause (t) of section 2 of the Act.

        Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

        1. Nature of Transactions: Sale or Works Contract

        The primary issue in these appeals is whether the transactions involving the manufacture and supply of ships by the appellant constitute a 'sale' or a 'works contract' under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The appellant, M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Limited, argued that the transactions were works contracts and hence not liable to sales tax. The assessing authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the transactions were sales and thus taxable. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal divided the contracts into two groups, following a previous High Court decision that similar contracts were works contracts. However, for the remaining contracts, the Tribunal applied a later decision which classified such transactions as sales.

        2. Definitions and Legal Tests for Distinction

        The definitions of 'sale' and 'works contract' under clauses (n) and (t) of section 2 of the Act were crucial. The court noted that the distinction between a contract of sale and a works contract is complex and has been the subject of several judicial decisions. The intention of the parties, determined by the overall terms and conditions of the contract, is key. The court referenced several legal principles and tests from previous cases and authoritative texts to determine whether the primary object of the contract was the transfer of property in goods or the provision of work and labour.

        3. Analysis of Contract Terms

        The court examined the terms of the contract between the appellant and the Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd., which was representative of the contracts in question. Key points included:
        - The appellant (builder) agreed to build and deliver ships to the customer (owner) for a fixed price.
        - The builder provided all materials and labour.
        - Payment was phased, with significant portions paid before the ship was fully built and delivered.
        - The property in the vessel was said to pass to the owner upon payment of the first instalment, but this was subject to the builder's lien for unpaid portions and the builder's responsibility for risks until delivery.

        4. Judicial Precedents and Principles

        The court reviewed several precedents, including decisions in Patnaik and Company v. State of Orissa, Sentinel Rolling Shutters & Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, and Union of India v. Central India Machinery Manufacturing Co. Ltd. These cases highlighted the importance of the substance of the contract over its form, the ownership of materials, and the intention of the parties. The principles deduced included:
        - The main object of the contract determines whether it is a sale or a works contract.
        - If the property in goods passes to the buyer upon completion and delivery, it is a sale.
        - The involvement of the buyer's supervision or specifications does not necessarily change the nature of the contract.

        5. Application to Current Case

        Applying these principles, the court concluded that the contracts in question were for the sale of ships. The ships were built to order, with the builder providing all materials and labour. The phased payments were seen as advance payments towards the purchase price. The property in the ships passed to the buyer upon delivery and acceptance, not progressively with each payment. The court found that the contracts involved the transfer of property in goods (ships) for a price, fitting the definition of a sale under the Act.

        Conclusion

        The court upheld the decisions of the High Court and the Tribunal, ruling that the transactions were sales and therefore subject to sales tax. The appeals were dismissed, and costs were to be borne as incurred. The contracts were determined to involve the sale of vessels within the meaning of clause (n) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, and not merely works contracts as defined in clause (t).

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found