TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 400
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Adv.- For the Respondent ORDER Both the Learned Counsels submit that the controversy involved in the present case is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt B. Narasamma V/s. Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Karnataka & Another, [Civil Appeal No.4149 of 2007 dated 11.08.2016], in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such, are merely subject to some processing or finishing, or are merely joined together, and therefore remain commercially the same goods which cannot be taxed again, given the rigor of Section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act. We fail to see how the aforesaid judgment can further carry the case of the revenue. 18. We may note that in Civil Appeal No.4318 of 2007, Larsen & Toubro Ltd, V/s. State ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unfortunately adverted only to the rectification order dated 30.11.2005 and not to the original order of 11.1.2002 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 merit, but at this point of time we find this would not serve any purpose. Instead....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of doors, window frames, grills, etc., in which they claimed exemption for iron and steel goods that went into the creation of these items, after which the said doors, window frames, grills, etc., were fitted into buildings and other structures. On facts, therefore, we find that the High Court's judgment is correct and does not need to be interfered with inasmuch as the iron and steel goods, a....