2008 (7) TMI 938 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Tax dispute resolved in favor of applicant in works contract case

The revision case involved a dispute over tax liability on inter-State sales in works contracts for the assessment year 1991-92. The applicant contested ... Tax on execution of works contract - Held that:- The authorities below including the Tribunal were not justified to separate the works contract in two contracts, one for supply of goods and the other towards installation expenses. The contract was one and indivisible. Thus, it is held that the authorities below were not justified in law in imposing tax on the amount of ₹ 13,96,228.23 which was received by the applicant on account of execution of works contract. The assessing authority was not justified in levying the tax on the material used for the amount of ₹ 7,00,000 in execution of works contract. The question of law raised in the revision is therefore, decided in favour of the applicant and against the Department and demand of Central sales tax on supply of sprinklers used in execution of works contract is held contrary to law. Issues:1. Interpretation of tax liability on inter-State sales in works contract.2. Assessment of tax on material value in works contract.3. Application of legal principles from Gannon Dunkerley & Co. case.4. Determination of indivisibility in works contract for tax purposes.Issue 1: Interpretation of tax liability on inter-State sales in works contractThe revision involved a limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of 'sprinkler irrigation system' under works contracts for parties outside the State of U.P. The dispute arose regarding the tax liability on inter-State sales for the assessment year 1991-92. The assessing authority levied tax on the material value of goods used in the works contract, leading to a challenge in the revision.Issue 2: Assessment of tax on material value in works contractThe assessing authority bifurcated the works contract into components of goods, labor, and profit. The applicant contested the tax imposition on the entire amount received for the works contract, arguing against the separation of the contract into the supply of goods and installation expenses. The revision questioned the justification of levying tax on the material used in the execution of works contracts.Issue 3: Application of legal principles from Gannon Dunkerley & Co. caseThe revision referred to the legal principles established in the Gannon Dunkerley & Co. case, emphasizing that a works contract should not be split into distinct parts for tax purposes. The judgment highlighted that the State Legislature cannot convert an outside sale or a sale in the course of import and export into a sale inside the State. The revision relied on legal precedents to support the argument against the imposition of tax on inter-State sales within the works contract.Issue 4: Determination of indivisibility in works contract for tax purposesThe revision concluded that the works contract in question was indivisible and should not have been separated into distinct contracts for supply of goods and installation expenses. Citing legal positions from relevant cases, including Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi, the revision held that the tax imposition on the amount received for the works contract was unjustified. The revision succeeded, setting aside the Tribunal's order and ruling in favor of the applicant against the Department's demand for Central sales tax on the supply of sprinklers used in the execution of works contracts.