https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161896 The Karnataka High Court reasoned that the design and construction of natural draught cooling towers did not fall within the general civil works entry because that phrase had to be read in context with the illustrative items of construction such as buildings, bridges and roads. It applied the principle that a specific entry prevails over a general one and treated the cooling tower provision as the governing entry for supply and erection of cooling towers. The Court also held that the rule of construing ambiguity in favour of the assessee did not apply, as the entry was not reasonably doubtful. The work was therefore taxable under the specific cooling tower entry, not the civil works entry. en-us Fri, 07 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:02:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161896 The Karnataka High Court reasoned that the design and construction of natural draught cooling towers did not fall within the general civil works entry because that phrase had to be read in context with the illustrative items of construction such as buildings, bridges and roads. It applied the principle that a specific entry prevails over a general one and treated the cooling tower provision as the governing entry for supply and erection of cooling towers. The Court also held that the rule of construing ambiguity in favour of the assessee did not apply, as the entry was not reasonably doubtful. The work was therefore taxable under the specific cooling tower entry, not the civil works entry. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 07 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161896