1958 (7) TMI 36

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e petitioner submitted a tender for constructing 90 bungalows for a lump sum of about Rs. 57,86,500 on the forms and general conditions supplied. On the 21st of December, 1955, the Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited accepted the petitioner's tender and asked the petitioner to deposit a security of 2 per cent of the amount of the tender. After depositing the security the petitioner proceeded to execute the lump sum contracts for construction of the bungalows. On the 25th of April, 1956, the Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, Jamshedpur, issued a notice under section 13 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act calling upon the petitioner to produce books of account etc. The petitioner objected that no sales tax was payable as there was a lump sum buildin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ract, standards of execution and special conditions of the contract have not been produced on behalf of the petitioner in this case. In the absence of the formal contract it is difficult for me to say whether this case comes within the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Madras v. Gannon Dunkerley and Company (Madras) Limited[1958] 9 S.T.C. 353. It is possible that the parties may have entered into distinct and separate contracts, one for the transfer of materials for money consideration and the other for payment of remuneration for services and for work done. In such a case there would be really two agreements, though there is a single instrument embodying them, and the power of the State to separate the agreement to sell ....