https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382466 Goods imported into Uttar Pradesh for use in executing a pre-existing civil works contract were held not to justify exclusion from normal assessment under the compounding scheme where the applicable earlier binding decision had already resolved the effect of Rule 9 of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2008 in line with Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 against the revenue. The Court also relied on concurrent factual findings that the assessee brought the goods into the State pursuant to the works contract and used them in its execution, and no perversity in those findings was shown. The revision therefore failed, and the revenue's challenge was rejected. en-us Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jul 2019 18:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382466 Goods imported into Uttar Pradesh for use in executing a pre-existing civil works contract were held not to justify exclusion from normal assessment under the compounding scheme where the applicable earlier binding decision had already resolved the effect of Rule 9 of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2008 in line with Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 against the revenue. The Court also relied on concurrent factual findings that the assessee brought the goods into the State pursuant to the works contract and used them in its execution, and no perversity in those findings was shown. The revision therefore failed, and the revenue's challenge was rejected. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382466