2024 (9) TMI 545

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....05.2011. 2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is doing Industrial Engineering Services for various office clients and entered into a contract with the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Directorate of Procurement, New Delhi, on 02.12.1999 and another contract with the Office of the Deputy Chief Electrical Engineer (Shops), South Central Railways, Secunderabad, on 27.09.1999. 2.2. The said work contracts had to be undertaken at Mumbai and Secunderabad respectively. When that being so, for the purpose of execution of the work contracts, necessary goods were supplied and the work contracts were undertaken by the petitioner at the respective places, namely, Mumbai and Secunderabad. 2.3. It is to be noted that as p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Special Tribunal the Hon'ble High Court quashed the said order reported in 128 STC 358 following the decisions of the Apex Court reported in 73 STC 370 and 88 STC 204 wherein the High Court held that when the contract is interstate in nature, the said application of Section 3B under the local Act does not apply. ..." 2.6. In support of the said contentions, in fact the petitioner relied upon the jugdment of this Court in the case of Sundaram Industries Limited vs. Commercial Tax Officer and Ors. (2002) 128 STC 358, following the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Builders' Association of India and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. (1989) 73 STC 370 and M/s.Gannon Dunkerley and Ors. vs. The State ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fice of the Deputy Chief Electrical Engineer (Shops), Secunderabad, there was another contract entered into by the petitioner to an extent of Rs. 8,23,842/- Despite these document which were available for consideration, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that in the absence of any documents to establish that the works done by the petitioner are work contracts, the materials that have been transported are only to be treated as "sale" and not as materials supplied for the purpose of work contracts and therefore, to that extent, the Tribunal accepted the case projected by the Revenue before the Tribunal. 5. Insofar as the applicability of Section 2(g) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, w.e.f. 11.05.2002, if had the works done by the pet....