1992 (7) TMI 307

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thority, in his assessment, points out the objection as follows: "Works contract for Rs. 39,063.15. This is lump sum indivisible works contract for the supply and fixing of doors and windows at the customers' premises. We are enclosing herewith copies of (photostat) of the works order/ quotations in support of our stand." After pointing out the objection as above, the assessing officer came to the conclusion that the transaction could not be treated as works contract, in the absence of positive proof. He came to the conclusion that there is no agreement or no proof in the accounts or the sale bills that the door frames had actually been fixed on the buildings and particularly there is no evidence to show who transported the door frames to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ontains that: "doors and windows made according to the approved blue print of your engineer and fixing the shutters." Relying upon the invoices and the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Nenu Ram [1970] 26 STC 268 and also in Vanguard Rolling. Shutters & Steel Works v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1977] 39 STC 372, learned counsel for the assessee contends that the price charged by the assessee from the customer was one lump sum without at all specifying as to what part was meant for the materials used or fabricated and what part for the services or labour put in by the assessee. Learned counsel points out that the process involved in the making of doors and windows and their actual fitting to the premises in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccasion to consider the issue with regard to the manufacture, supply and fixing of iron shutters at customer's premises for lump sum payment in Vanguard Rolling Shutters & Steel Works v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1977] 39 STC 372. The Supreme Court observed at page 375: "The question as to under what circumstances a contract can be said to be a works contract is not free from difficulty and has to depend on the facts of each case. It is difficult to lay down any rule of universal application, but there are some well-recognised tests which are laid down by decided cases of this Court which afford guidelines for determining as to whether a contract in question is a works contract or a contract for supply of goods. One of the important tests....