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 petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the composition scheme in respect of its indivisible works contracts for installation of waste water treatment and sewage treatment plants.
Analysis: The composition scheme was framed for indivisible civil contracts and its scope was not confined to mere building construction. The expression used in the scheme and the schedule covered civil works of wide amplitude, including works involving drainage, sewerage, foundations, RCC work, walls, roofs, and allied civil construction. The contracts in question required extensive civil works and installation of machinery as integral and inextricable parts of the same projects. Since the plants could not be completed without substantial civil construction, the contracts could not be treated as mere fabrication and installation of plant and machinery.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the composition scheme for both contracts.
Ratio Decidendi: A contract remains an indivisible civil contract where installation of plant or machinery is inseparably combined with substantial civil construction necessary for completion of the project, and such a contract falls within a composition scheme framed for civil works.