Works contract dealers may claim registration entries and declaration forms where the statute does not expressly exclude them.

A dealer executing works contracts is not automatically barred from having goods entered in the registration certificate as goods intended for resale if the statutory requirements for registration are otherwise met. The Orissa High Court held that the mere use of goods in works contract execution does not, by itself, justify curtailing registration-linked benefits where the governing Act does not contain an express exclusion. On that basis, the dealer was also entitled to relevant declaration forms under the State Act and the Central Act, including form XXXIV and C forms, subject to the statutory conditions governing their issue and use.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a dealer executing works contracts can seek insertion of goods used in execution of such contracts in the registration certificate for purchase as goods intended for resale. (ii) Whether such a dealer is entitled to declaration forms under the State Act and the Central Act, including form XXXIV and C forms.

Issue (i): Whether a dealer executing works contracts can seek insertion of goods used in execution of such contracts in the registration certificate for purchase as goods intended for resale.

Analysis: The statutory scheme distinguished ordinary resale transactions from works contract turnover. Under the State Act, the provisions relating to registration and the use of declaration forms were tied to goods specified as intended for resale. The Court held that the earlier Division Bench had wrongly treated the principle in the West Bengal case as applicable, because the Orissa enactment did not contain an equivalent self-contained framework that would justify denying registration entries merely because the goods were to be used in works contracts. If a dealer was otherwise entitled to registration, the certificate could not be curtailed by omitting the goods applied for merely on the assumption that they would be used in execution of works contracts.

Conclusion: The dealer executing works contracts is entitled to have the relevant goods entered in the registration certificate where the statutory requirements for registration are otherwise satisfied.

Issue (ii): Whether such a dealer is entitled to declaration forms under the State Act and the Central Act, including form XXXIV and C forms.

Analysis: The Court held that entitlement to declaration forms followed from valid registration and the statutory purpose for which the goods were specified. The mere fact that goods are used in execution of works contracts does not, by itself, eliminate the dealer's right to obtain the relevant declaration forms where the Act and Rules do not expressly prohibit such issue. The Court further held that the contrary view taken in the earlier Division Bench decision overlooked the absence of a comparable restrictive provision and the settled position that registration under the Central Act carries with it the incidents attached to that registration, including access to declaration forms where otherwise permissible.

Conclusion: The dealer executing works contracts is entitled to receive the relevant declaration forms under the State Act and the Central Act, subject to the statutory conditions governing their issue and use.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by holding that works-contract dealers are not barred merely by that character from seeking appropriate registration entries and declaration forms where the statutes otherwise permit such benefits.

Ratio Decidendi: A dealer executing a works contract may claim registration-linked benefits, including specification of goods and issue of declaration forms, unless the governing statute expressly excludes such entitlement; a mere use of goods in works execution is not by itself a ground to deny those benefits.

---