TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1161
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ominant intention of the parties to the transaction which is crucial to decide the issue. (2) Whether the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that since the printed materials supplied by the assessee have no commercial value in the sense that they cannot be marked in the open market, the impugned transactions were purely ones of work and labour" The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The respondent/assessee had reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 5,05,92,715 and Rs. 40,21,383, respectively claiming exemption on a turnover of Rs. 4,65,72,332 in the returns filed on the ground that they are doing only works contract. The assessing authority, while completing the assessment, rejected the exemption claimed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ransaction is a works contract or sale and this is possible only when the intention of the parties is found out. Having observed so, the apex court pointed out that in the execution of a contract for work, some materials are used and the property in the goods so used passes to the other party, the contractor undertaking to do the work would not necessarily be deemed on that account to sell the materials. Therefore, in every case of this nature of transaction, the assessing officer has to point rat which part of the job-work related to sale. 7. For better clarity, the relevant portion of the decision of the apex court reads as follows (page 14 in 73 STC):- "The primary difference between a contract for work or service and a contract for s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12, in T.C. No. 1984 of 2012, following the above said decision of the apex court held that the transaction in question does not call for any liability under the Act. 9. In the decision reported in [2014] 69 VST 506 (Mad) (State of Tamil Nadu v. Rainbow Printers), this court, while dealing with the printing of labels and supplied on job-work basis, after following the decision of this court reported in [2009] 26 VST 205 (Mad) (State of Tamil Nadu v. Premier Litho Works), held that the transaction in question could not be assessed to tax. 10. Following the above said decisions, this court, by order dated February 17, 2015 in T.C. (Revision) No. 1958 of 2006 (Heritage Printers v. Joint Commissioner (SMR) of Commercial Taxes [2015] 80 VST 47....