2009 (7) TMI 1160 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that the activity of manufacture and supply of flange assembly to Telco carried out by M/s. Auto Comp Corporation is not a transaction of sale as contemplated under section 2(28) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act 1959? Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that the activity of manufacture and supply of flange assembly is a sale under section 2(l) of the Maharashtra Sales Tax on the Transfer of Property in Goods involved in the Execution of Works Contracts (Re-enacted) Act 1989? Held that - Since the property in the goods (material used for production of innerflange) by the respondent in the execution of the contract of converting the steel plates into an assembly-flange is transferred to Telco it would undoubtedly amount to a sale as held by the Tribunal. We see no error in the view taken by the Tribunal. The question as framed would not arise. Consequently we decline the application.

Summary

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The legal questions considered in this judgment are:

(i) Whether the activity of manufacturing and supplying "flange assembly" to Telco by M/s. Auto Comp Corporation constitutes a "sale" under section 2(28) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959.

(ii) Whether the same activity is considered a "sale" under section 2(l) of the Maharashtra Sales Tax on the Transfer of Property in Goods involved in the Execution of Works Contracts (Re-enacted) Act, 1989.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue (i): Definition of "Sale" under the Bombay Sales Tax Act

Relevant legal framework and precedents: The Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 defines "sale" under section 2(28) as a sale of goods made within the State for cash, deferred payment, or other valuable consideration. The Supreme Court case of State of Madras v. Gannon Dunkerley & Co. (Madras) Ltd. established that in an indivisible contract, there is no sale of goods, leading to the 46th Amendment of the Constitution, allowing states to tax transactions described in clause (29A) of article 366.

Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court interpreted that the transaction in question, involving the conversion of steel plates into assembly-flange, does not constitute a "sale" as per section 2(28) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act. The main raw material, imported steel plates, is supplied by Telco, and the respondent merely converts these into assembly-flange, which is a works contract.

Key evidence and findings: The respondent uses its own material for the inner-flange, which is welded to the outer-flange made from Telco's steel plates. The Tribunal found that the passing of property in the respondent's material to Telco was incidental to the main contract of conversion.

Application of law to facts: The conversion of steel plates into assembly-flange is a single, indivisible contract, and the incidental transfer of property in the respondent's material does not constitute a "sale" under the Bombay Sales Tax Act.

Treatment of competing arguments: The applicant argued that the conversion charges included the value of goods transferred (inner-flange) and should be taxed. However, the Court rejected this, citing the indivisibility of the contract and the incidental nature of the property transfer.

Conclusions: The Court concluded that the transaction does not amount to a "sale" under section 2(28) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act.

Issue (ii): Definition of "Sale" under the Works Contract Act

Relevant legal framework and precedents: The Works Contract Act defines "sale" under section 2(l) as the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of a works contract. Section 6 levies tax on the turnover of such sales. The Supreme Court's decision in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v. State of Karnataka was considered, where the supply of parts in a works contract was not deemed a sale.

Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court held that the transaction falls under the definition of "sale" in the Works Contract Act, as it involves the transfer of property in goods (inner-flange) during the execution of a works contract.

Key evidence and findings: The respondent's use of its own material in the manufacture of the inner-flange, which is then welded to the outer-flange, constitutes a transfer of property in goods to Telco.

Application of law to facts: The Court applied the definition of "sale" under the Works Contract Act, determining that the transaction is taxable as it involves the transfer of property in goods within a works contract.

Treatment of competing arguments: The applicant's contention that the transaction should be taxed under the Bombay Sales Tax Act was rejected. The Court emphasized the applicability of the Works Contract Act to such transactions.

Conclusions: The Court concluded that the transaction is a "sale" under the Works Contract Act and is subject to tax.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Preserve verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning: The Court stated, "The transfer of the property in the goods (inner-flange) by the respondent to Telco does not amount to 'sale' within the meaning of the Bombay Sales Tax Act."

Core principles established: The Court reaffirmed that the definition of "sale" under the Bombay Sales Tax Act does not encompass transactions where the transfer of property is incidental to a works contract. However, such transactions can be taxable under the Works Contract Act.

Final determinations on each issue: The Court declined the application for reference, upholding the Tribunal's decision that the transaction is not a "sale" under the Bombay Sales Tax Act but is taxable under the Works Contract Act.