Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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>Court allows appeal, exempts inter-State purchase turnover from tax under Karnataka Sales Tax Act</h1> <h3>M/s ASEA BROWN BOVERI LTD. Versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA</h3> M/s ASEA BROWN BOVERI LTD. Versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA - [2014] 70 VST 84 (Kar) Issues Involved:1. Whether the turnover pertaining to inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of works contract is liable to tax under Section 5-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957.2. Whether the assessee is entitled for exemption from tax on inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of works contract under Section 5-B of the Act.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Whether the turnover pertaining to inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of works contract is liable to tax under Section 5-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957.The core issue revolves around whether the inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of a works contract are taxable under Section 5-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The assessee contended that the goods procured in the course of inter-State trade were already taxed under the Central Sales Tax Act and thus should not be taxed again under Section 5-B of the Karnataka Act. The Second Revisional Authority, however, revised the earlier order and brought the turnover pertaining to inter-State purchases under the tax net, arguing that the goods were stored by the assessee and not directly used in the works contract, thus not qualifying as an inter-State sale under Section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act.The court examined various precedents, including K.G. Khosla & Co. (P) Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, where it was held that the movement of goods from one state to another as an incident of the contract qualifies as an inter-State sale. The court also referred to Indure Ltd. vs. C.T.O. and others and Union of India vs. Khosla and Company Ltd., which reiterated that the movement of goods incidental to the contract suffices for it to be considered an inter-State sale.The court concluded that the movement of goods from other states to Karnataka was indeed an incident of the contract between the assessee and KPTCL. The goods were procured with the approval of KPTCL, inspected, and delivered directly to the project site, thus satisfying the criteria for an inter-State sale.Issue 2: Whether the assessee is entitled for exemption from tax on inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of works contract under Section 5-B of the Act.The court analyzed the definition of 'taxable turnover' under Section 2(u-1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, which explicitly excludes the turnover of purchases or sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. It also examined the definition of 'total turnover' under Section 2(u-2), which includes the aggregate turnover in all goods of a dealer at all places of business in the State.The court noted that the legislative power of the State under Entry 54 of the State List is subject to the limitations imposed by Entry 92-A of List I and Article 286 of the Constitution, which prohibits the State from taxing inter-State sales. The court emphasized that the Forty-Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, which allowed the State to tax the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of works contracts, did not extend to transactions that are inter-State in nature.The court concluded that the State Legislature cannot impose tax on inter-State transactions, as per the constitutional limitations and the definitions provided in the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to exemption from tax on inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of the works contract.Conclusion:The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the order of the Second Revisional Authority and confirming the order of the First Revisional Authority, which had dropped the proposal to levy tax under Section 5-B of the Act on inter-State purchases of goods used in the execution of the works contract. The court held that the turnover pertaining to inter-State purchases is not liable to tax under Section 5-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, and the assessee is entitled to exemption.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found