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>High Court corrects Sales Tax Tribunal's error on composite works contract, orders tax question referral.</h1> <h3>The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax VAT-III, Mumbai Versus M/s. Tata Infomedia Ltd.</h3> The High Court found that the Sales Tax Tribunal erred in not referring a legal question regarding the deduction of postage charges in a composite works ... Valuation - Whether Tribunal was justified in allowing deduction of postage charges from the total contract value, when dealer had opted for composition Scheme u/s 6A of the Maharashtra Sales Tax on transfer of property is goods involved in the execution of works contract (Re-enacted) Act, 1989 (in short 'Works Contract Act), for the levy of works contract tax on the contract of printing, binding and delivery of balance sheet to the share holders, which contract was in fact one whole indivisible contract of work - Held that:- Tribunal should have referred the above reproduced question of law for an opinion of this court. The tribunal's finding that job-work of franking and mailing the balance sheets, annual reports is an independent contract and could be termed as the contract of service and distinct from the works contract, although incorporated in the same document/contract, raises a question of law and which needs to be answered by this court - reference application should not have been dismissed by the tribunal. The order passed in that behalf by the tribunal, a copy of which is to be found on page 48 of the paperbook at Annexure 'E' dated 11th June, 2013 is quashed and set aside. Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of Revenue. Issues:1. Whether the Sales Tax Tribunal should forward a question of law for the High Court's opinion regarding the deduction of postage charges in a composite works contract.Analysis:The judgment pertains to an application seeking direction for the Sales Tax Tribunal to forward a question of law to the High Court. The issue revolves around the justification of allowing a deduction of postage charges in a composite works contract under the Maharashtra Sales Tax Act. The respondent, a printing press business, entered into a contract for printing balance sheets and annual reports. The tribunal's decision to treat the job-work of franking and mailing as an independent contract raised a question of law. The High Court, in its analysis, found that the bifurcation of the contract resulted in the evasion of tax on postal charges. The court reviewed the tribunal's orders and concluded that the question of law should have been referred for the High Court's opinion.The applicant argued that the contract was artificially bifurcated, leading to the exclusion of tax on postal charges amounting to Rs. 8 crores. The tribunal's finding that the job-work of franking and mailing could be considered a separate contract of service raised a legal issue. The High Court opined that the tribunal erred in not referring the question of law for its opinion. The court noted that the bifurcation of the contract, as per the tribunal's decision, necessitated a legal clarification regarding the tax implications on the postal charges.In the absence of the respondent or their advocate, the High Court carefully examined the tribunal's order and the reference application. The court concluded that the tribunal's dismissal of the reference application was incorrect. Consequently, the High Court allowed the present application, directing the tribunal to forward the question of law for the court's opinion within eight weeks. The court emphasized that all arguments related to the question of law were to be considered open for further discussion. The judgment highlights the importance of addressing legal questions arising from composite works contracts to ensure proper tax implications and compliance with relevant laws.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found