https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164717 A railway ballast contract was treated as a composite contract because the contractor had to procure and supply materials as part of performance, not merely execute labour. The court relied on the original agreement, incorporated tender conditions, and surrounding records showing supply obligations and actual purchase and delivery of jelly to the railway. A later railway letter could not override the contractual terms. On that footing, the levy of tax and the consequential penalty under section 12(3) were sustained, and the challenge failed. en-us Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Nov 2014 14:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164717 A railway ballast contract was treated as a composite contract because the contractor had to procure and supply materials as part of performance, not merely execute labour. The court relied on the original agreement, incorporated tender conditions, and surrounding records showing supply obligations and actual purchase and delivery of jelly to the railway. A later railway letter could not override the contractual terms. On that footing, the levy of tax and the consequential penalty under section 12(3) were sustained, and the challenge failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164717