1989 (9) TMI 355 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The constitutional validity of certain amendments and rules related to sales tax, assessment of sales tax liability in a works contract involving subcontractors, and the liability of the main contractor for sales tax.

Judgment Details:

1. The petitioners initially sought a declaration that certain amendments and rules related to sales tax were ultra vires the Constitution of India. They also requested the quashing of notices and sought appropriate writs.

2. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the relevant amendments, which impacted the issues raised in the writ application. Previous decisions had also found certain rules to be ultra vires the Constitution.

3. An application for amending the writ petition was filed by the petitioners, requesting that the assessing authority not assess them for the part of the works contract assigned to a subcontractor.

4. The petitioners had entered into a contract for a sewage treatment plant and engaged a subcontractor for a portion of the work. The subcontractor was paying sales tax as per the Bihar Finance Act and Sales Tax Rules.

5. The petitioners argued that since the subcontractor was separately assessed for the work done, they should not be held liable for sales tax on that portion of the contract.

6. The Supreme Court had ruled that sales tax is payable only on goods supplied by the contractor to the principal in a works contract. Subcontracts are considered part of the main contract, and goods supplied by subcontractors are also taxable.

7. The court allowed the amendment to the writ petition and treated it as part of the main petition. The order of assessment and penalty against the petitioners were quashed, directing the assessing authority to proceed in accordance with the law and relevant court decisions.

8. The judgment emphasized that goods supplied in a works contract are taxable only once, whether by the main contractor or subcontractor. If the subcontractor has already been assessed, no further sales tax should be levied on the same goods.

9. The writ petition was partly allowed, with the assessment order and penalty notice being quashed. The assessing authority was directed to proceed in line with legal decisions and observations made in the judgment. No costs were awarded in the case.