Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the sales tax authorities could proceed to assess sales tax on the petitioners in respect of materials supplied and used in execution of the coke oven construction contract, and whether the proceedings were liable to be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Analysis: The contract was examined as a composite arrangement for constructing and installing a coke oven battery, but the decisive feature was that it contained an express stipulation that materials and plant brought on site under the German and Indian sections would immediately become the owner's property. That contractual term distinguished the case from the principle applied in the cited Supreme Court decision, where the passing of property was treated as arising by accretion and not by express transfer. The Court also noted that the price and value of goods could not be excluded merely because the contract was for a lump sum, and that the tax authorities were entitled to investigate the accounts and other materials to determine whether any taxable sale of goods had occurred and to what extent.
Conclusion: The petitioners did not make out a case for quashing the assessment proceedings, and the writ petitions were liable to be dismissed.