TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 162
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st Appellate Authority were legally justified in allowing the benefit of section 3F(2) (b) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act specifically when the dealer has opted the composition of scheme and has agreed to pay the tax in accordance with the composition of scheme dated 11.2.05? II. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal as well as Ist Appellate Authority were legally justified in granting the benefit of Section 3,4 and 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act especially when the dealer has opted for composition of money in lieu of tax under section 7(D)? III. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Commercial Tax Tribunal as well as Ist Appellate Authority were legally justified in del....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e scheme of compounding noted above, the Assessing Officer excluded the said value of goods from the assessment made on compounded basis and subjected the same to tax under the normal mode of assessment. It is here that the dispute arose giving rise to the present revision. According to the revenue, since there is no exclusionary clause under Section 6 of the Act read with Rule 9 of the Value Added Tax Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'), to exclude from the scope of assessment goods/transactions that may be covered under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Central Act'), the assessee was liable to suffer a full rate of tax on those goods. Accordingly, a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt sale affected by the assessee in favour of the contractee would remain excluded by virtue of Section 3 of the Central Act. The aforesaid findings recorded by the First Appellate Authority both as to fact as also on the inference of law drawn by it have been affirmed by the Tribunal. 8. Sri Bipin Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel, would contend that in absence of any provision similar to that contained in Section 3-F(2)(b)(i) of the UP Trade Tax Act, 1948 in the UP VAT Act or the Rules, there can be no exclusion from assessment of transaction that may otherwise fall within the description of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Act. Even otherwise, he would submit that in the present case, it has not been examined by the authorities....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lear categorical finding of fact recorded by both the appellate authorities, that the entire quantity of goods had been imported in pursuance of the works contract awarded to the assessee and those goods had been applied for execution of that contract. 12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in the first place, the issue raised by learned Standing Counsel on Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Act being not applicable in view of the different language of Rule 9 of the UP VAT Rules, had been considered and decided against the revenue in the case of Comfort Systems Vs Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P., Lucknow (supra). The same argument had been advanced in that case. However, relying in view of the decision of the Supreme Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se there was no privity of contract between the contractee and the actual seller of the goods (from whom the assessee made the purchases), and though such seller was not known/specified at the time of the execution of the works contract document, it would make no difference to the eligibilty to deduction claimed by the assessee under Rule 9(1)(e) of the Rules, on deemed interstate sale arising upon transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of the works contract. On the findings recorded by the Tribunal, the goods in question had been moved from outside the State solely by reason of the pre-existing works contract and those goods had been applied only solely the execution of that works contract. Therefore, the deemed s....