https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436318 The Karnataka HC noted that the existence of an alternative statutory appeal under the VAT law did not bar writ intervention where the controversy was already governed by binding precedent, so the challenge on maintainability failed. On the tax issue, the Court applied section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act and found that elevators manufactured in Maharashtra and moved to Karnataka pursuant to purchase orders were inter-State sales, even though erection, installation, testing and commissioning followed at the site. The transactions were therefore not treated as a composite local works contract exigible to State VAT, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected. en-us Thu, 22 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Apr 2023 09:09:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436318 The Karnataka HC noted that the existence of an alternative statutory appeal under the VAT law did not bar writ intervention where the controversy was already governed by binding precedent, so the challenge on maintainability failed. On the tax issue, the Court applied section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act and found that elevators manufactured in Maharashtra and moved to Karnataka pursuant to purchase orders were inter-State sales, even though erection, installation, testing and commissioning followed at the site. The transactions were therefore not treated as a composite local works contract exigible to State VAT, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 22 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436318