2017 (4) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Smt. Patri Shashikala K, Advs. for respondent. ORDER DR. VINEET KOTHARI, J.,   1. Both the learned counsel at bar submit that the controversy raised in the present revision petition filed by the Revenue under Section 65 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, stands covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B. Narasamma Vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Comme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....works contract. However, the iron and steel which are used in fabrication of items in the form of grills, gates, doors and windows are taxable at higher rate as the same are transferred in the different form. The quantum of iron and steel used in the same form and different form are not available on the lower authorities records. The same requires to be segregated. If there is no element of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ules in order to compute total and taxable turnover." 3. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue had preferred this Revision Petition before this court. 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B. Narasamma (supra), following its earlier decisions in the case of Builders Association of Indian and Others Vs. Union of India and Others, AIR 1989 SC 1371 and M/s. Gannon Dunkerley and Company and O....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....11.2005. The High Court, in the impugned judgment dated 01.09.2006, unfortunately adverted only to the rectification order dated 30.11.2005 and not to the original order of 11.01.2002 and thus dismissed the revision petition stating that no question of law arose. Ordinarily, we would have set aside the judgment and remanded the matter back to the High Court to determine the matter on merits, b....