<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (2) TMI 474 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158244</link>
    <description>The expression &quot;works contract&quot; in section 2(m) of the Entry Tax Act was construed strictly and confined to contracts for construction or installation expressly covered by the provision, such as buildings, dams, bridges, factories, machinery or fittings. Drilling of tube wells on labour basis was held to have drilling as its dominant object and not to amount to construction of works or installation within the statutory language. Because the legislature had not specifically included tube-well drilling, the activity could not be brought within the definition by implication. The issue was therefore decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2013 16:07:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=330258" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (2) TMI 474 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158244</link>
      <description>The expression &quot;works contract&quot; in section 2(m) of the Entry Tax Act was construed strictly and confined to contracts for construction or installation expressly covered by the provision, such as buildings, dams, bridges, factories, machinery or fittings. Drilling of tube wells on labour basis was held to have drilling as its dominant object and not to amount to construction of works or installation within the statutory language. Because the legislature had not specifically included tube-well drilling, the activity could not be brought within the definition by implication. The issue was therefore decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158244</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>