https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436137 Under the Kerala Value Added Tax framework, a levy based on a works contract required proof of transfer of property in goods involved in execution, not merely the existence of a supply arrangement. The court noted that the authorities proceeded on an incorrect jurisdictional premise by treating fixed monthly charges and the plant arrangement as consideration for a works contract, even though the plant remained the appellant's property during the contract term and could be acquired only on termination. On that basis, writ interference was permitted despite the alternate remedy. The assessment and penalty orders were set aside in substantial part, while the input tax credit dispute on capital goods was remitted for fresh consideration. en-us Mon, 03 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jan 2024 16:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436137 Under the Kerala Value Added Tax framework, a levy based on a works contract required proof of transfer of property in goods involved in execution, not merely the existence of a supply arrangement. The court noted that the authorities proceeded on an incorrect jurisdictional premise by treating fixed monthly charges and the plant arrangement as consideration for a works contract, even though the plant remained the appellant's property during the contract term and could be acquired only on termination. On that basis, writ interference was permitted despite the alternate remedy. The assessment and penalty orders were set aside in substantial part, while the input tax credit dispute on capital goods was remitted for fresh consideration. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 03 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436137