Supreme Court Judgment

Save Share

This query is : Resolved

Hemant Gupta (Querist)

08 March 2009 Hello,

There was a recent judgement of Supreme Court in year 2008, regarding the leviable of CST in the case of Works Contract, wherein it was decided about the levy of CST in the case of purhcase of goods from outside the state or likewise. I do not know the name of the Appellant but the case is for sure.

Please if anyone can give me any link to this judgement or mail me any copy or just inform me where I can get this judgement.

My email id is:- ca.hkgupta@yahoo.com

CA. O.P. Agarwalla

CA. O.P. Agarwalla (Expert)

31 March 2009
Was it the following?

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

A & G Projects & Technologies Ltd.

v.

State of Karnataka

S.H. KAPADIA AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 7233 of 2008

December 11, 2008

Section 3, read with section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - When is a sale or purchase of goods said to take place in course of interstate trade or commerce - Whether proviso to section 9(1) applies only to ‘subsequent sales’ covered by section 3(b) and not sales under section 3(a) - Held, yes - Assessee, engaged in execution of electrical works contract was awarded a contract by KPCL - Pursuant to that contract assessee appointed ‘B’ Ltd as EPC contract for procuring equipments from manufacturers - Assessee claimed that there were three sales contracts; first sale by manufacturers to ‘B’ Ltd; second sale was by ‘B’ Ltd to it; and third sale was by it to ‘KPCL’ - According to assessee, second and third sales were subsequent sales and would be exempted under section 6(2) - Assessing Officer rejecting, contention of assessee held that all three sales were falling under section 3(a) and not under section 3(b), therefore, assessee was not entitled to exemption under section 6(2) - However, Assessing Officer relaying on proviso to section 9(1) held that State Government was to levy tax thereon - On appeal, Joint Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld levy of tax - Tribunal, allowed appeal of assessee - However, on revision petition filed by department, High Court held that proviso to section 9(1) was applicable in instant case and State Government was ‘appropriate’ authority to collect tax in respect of goods sold by assessee to KPCL - Whether once above three sales fell under section 3(a) then under section 9(1) tax had got to be collected by State Government from which movement of goods commenced - Held, yes - Whether since case of assessee regarding subsequent sales effected during movement of goods stood specifically rejected both by Assessing Officer and Joint Commissioner (Appeals) question of taxing such sales under proviso to section 9(1) did not arise - Held, yes [Para 13 and 14]

You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now