https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329990 Construction equipment used in execution of a works contract was treated as machinery for the purpose of entry 35 of the Gujarat VAT notification, even though it could also fall within the definition of a motor vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act. The decisive test was the statutory description of the goods as machinery used in works contract execution, and the absence of a separate motor vehicle entry meant that dual character did not shift the goods to the residuary entry. A later amendment excluding machinery in the form of motor vehicles indicated that, before 15.02.2010, such goods remained covered by entry 35, and the exclusion was not shown to be retrospective. en-us Thu, 07 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329990 Construction equipment used in execution of a works contract was treated as machinery for the purpose of entry 35 of the Gujarat VAT notification, even though it could also fall within the definition of a motor vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act. The decisive test was the statutory description of the goods as machinery used in works contract execution, and the absence of a separate motor vehicle entry meant that dual character did not shift the goods to the residuary entry. A later amendment excluding machinery in the form of motor vehicles indicated that, before 15.02.2010, such goods remained covered by entry 35, and the exclusion was not shown to be retrospective. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 07 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329990