Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether iron and steel used in execution of civil works contracts continued to be declared goods taxable only at the concessional rate of 4%, and whether any question of law arose warranting interference in revision.
Analysis: The dispute was covered by the Supreme Court's ruling that iron and steel used in construction do not lose their character as declared goods merely because they are cut, bent, tied, or embedded in concrete during execution of works contracts. Such goods continue to attract the statutory limitation on tax under the Central Sales Tax regime, and the State cannot levy tax beyond the ceiling prescribed for declared goods. In view of that settled position, the revision presented no surviving question of law for independent consideration.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee, and the Revenue's revision was not entertained on merits.
Final Conclusion: The judgment affirms that iron and steel used in construction retain their declared-goods character and are taxable only within the statutory limitations applicable to such goods, resulting in dismissal of the Revenue's revision.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods specified as declared goods do not lose that character merely by being used in works contracts, and the tax payable on them remains subject to the ceiling imposed by the Central Sales Tax law.