Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        -

        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

        <h1>Tax liability upheld for works contract under Assam Sales Tax Act</h1> <h3>SS. Photogroaphic Lab. Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of Assam and others (and other cases)</h3> The court upheld the tax liability imposed on the petitioners under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, for their business transactions classified as ... - Issues Involved:1. Liability to tax under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.2. Classification of business transactions as 'works contract.'3. Transfer of property in goods and its tax implications.4. Applicability of precedents and constitutional provisions.Detailed Analysis:1. Liability to Tax under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993:The primary issue is the imposed liability to tax under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 ('the Act') on the petitioners for different assessment periods. The petitioners contended before the respondent-authorities that their business nature did not warrant such tax demands, claiming that the process involved in their business did not constitute a sale of goods or transfer of property in goods as per section 8(i)(e) of the Act. However, the respondent No. 3 made summary assessments for the years 1993-94 to 1998-99, raising demands for various amounts payable as tax under the Act. Appeals against these assessments were dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals), confirming the tax liability.2. Classification of Business Transactions as 'Works Contract':The petitioners argued that their business transactions could not be considered as 'works contract' within the meaning of the Act. They claimed that no transfer of property in goods was involved, and their activities were service-based, inseparable from the materials used in the process. The respondent-authorities, however, held that the petitioners were engaged in 'works contract' as defined under section 2(38)(iv) of the Act, thus chargeable to tax under section 8(1)(e) of the Act, in view of article 366(29A) of the Constitution of India and entry No. 24 of Schedule VI of the Act.3. Transfer of Property in Goods and Its Tax Implications:The petitioners contended that their business transactions did not involve any transfer of property in goods, and therefore, no tax was leviable under section 8(1) of the Act. They argued that the materials used in the process, such as photo paper and chemicals, were inseparable from the service provided, and thus, no transfer of property in such materials was conceivable. The respondents, however, maintained that the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of the works contract attracted tax liability under the Act, as photo papers, chemicals, etc., were involved at the delivery of the finished products to the customer.4. Applicability of Precedents and Constitutional Provisions:The petitioners relied on several decisions, including Rainbow Colour Lab v. State of Madhya Pradesh, to support their arguments. However, the learned Additional Advocate-General countered that the decision in Rainbow Colour Lab was no longer good law in light of the subsequent decision in Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs. The court noted that the decision in Rainbow Colour Lab ran counter to the express provision contained in article 366(29A) and the Constitution Bench decision in Builders' Association of India v. Union of India. The court held that even if the dominant intention of the contract is to render a service, after the 46th Amendment of the Constitution, the State was empowered to levy sales tax on the materials used in such contracts.Conclusion:The court concluded that the impugned assessment and demand did not suffer from any lack of jurisdiction or vitiating illegality. The petitions were dismissed, and it was observed that the decision in Associated Cement Companies Ltd. had by implication overruled the ratio in Rainbow Colour Lab. The matter was suggested to be placed before the honourable Chief Justice for appropriate orders to refer the issue to a larger Bench for a binding resolution.Petitions dismissed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found