2006 (10) TMI 389 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Tax liability on stone boulders used in a works contract.
2. Applicability of concessional rate of tax under Form 3-D.
3. Interpretation of the notification dated April 27, 1987.
4. Proof of purchase of boulders from U.P. Forest Corporation.
5. Applicability of Section 3-G of the U.P. Trade Tax Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Tax Liability on Stone Boulders Used in a Works Contract:

The applicant, a civil contractor, executed a works contract for constructing a dam on the river Ganga. The assessing authority levied tax on the turnover of Rs. 51,91,664 on the deemed sales of stone boulders. The applicant argued that the boulders used were purchased from the U.P. Forest Corporation and thus not liable to tax. However, the Tribunal upheld the tax levy, estimating the turnover of boulders at Rs. 46,00,000 and imposing a tax rate of 6.6%.

2. Applicability of Concessional Rate of Tax under Form 3-D:

The applicant claimed a concessional rate of tax against Form 3-D under Section 3-G of the Act. The first appellate authority allowed this benefit, but the Tribunal disallowed it, sustaining the levy of tax at 6.6%. The court noted that the benefit of concessional tax under Section 3-G was not applicable for the period prior to March 17, 1992, as Section 3-F was not subject to Section 3-G before this date.

3. Interpretation of the Notification Dated April 27, 1987:

The applicant contended that the works contract for supplying and laying stone boulders was not covered under the 15 specified works contracts in the notification dated April 27, 1987. The court found this argument misconceived, stating that the contract was for constructing a dam, an indivisible works contract, which included supplying and laying boulders. The construction of a dam is explicitly mentioned in the notification under civil works.

4. Proof of Purchase of Boulders from U.P. Forest Corporation:

The applicant failed to prove that the boulders were purchased from the U.P. Forest Corporation. The court noted that the documents submitted related to the payment of royalty, not tax. The Tribunal's finding that the purchase from the Forest Corporation was not established was upheld. The court referenced a similar case where it was held that the payment of royalty does not equate to the boulders having suffered sales tax.

5. Applicability of Section 3-G of the U.P. Trade Tax Act:

Section 3-G provides a concessional rate of tax for sales to government departments or corporations if a declaration in Form 3-D is furnished. However, Section 3-G was amended to include Section 3-F only from March 17, 1992. Prior to this, Section 3-G did not override Section 3-F, which is an independent charging section. Therefore, for the period before March 17, 1992, the benefit of concessional tax under Section 3-G was not available for transactions covered under Section 3-F.

Conclusion:

The court dismissed the revision, holding that the applicant's arguments lacked merit. The works contract for constructing the dam was taxable, and the applicant failed to prove the purchase of boulders from the U.P. Forest Corporation. Additionally, the benefit of concessional tax under Section 3-G was not applicable for the period in question.