Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2023 (12) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (12) TMI 1204 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Raipur.
2. Inclusion of various articles in the registration certificate under Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
3. Interpretation of Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and Rule 13 of the Central Sales Tax (R & T) Act, 1957.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of the Order by Deputy Commissioner

The petitioner challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Raipur dated 07.06.2012, which dismissed the revision preferred by the petitioner and affirmed the order by the Commercial Tax Officer, Durg dated 19.04.2011.

Issue 2: Inclusion of Articles in Registration Certificate

The petitioner, engaged in the execution of a works contract, applied to include various articles in the registration certificate under Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Commercial Tax Officer partly allowed the application by adding only Soil (Murum) and rejected the inclusion of other articles like Cement, Sand, Boulder, Gitti, Steel, etc. The Deputy Commissioner upheld this decision, stating that items like Truck, Tripper, Dumper, JCB, Crane, Dozer, etc., are not directly used in the execution of the works contract.

Issue 3: Interpretation of Section 8(3)(b) and Rule 13

The petitioner argued that according to Section 8(3)(b) and Rule 13, goods used in the manufacture or processing of goods for sale, including equipment and machinery, should be included in the registration certificate. The petitioner cited judgments from the Supreme Court and High Courts, emphasizing that goods used in the manufacturing process qualify for special treatment even if not directly incorporated into the end product.

The court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in J.K. Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer, Kanpur, which held that goods intended for use in the manufacturing process qualify for special treatment under Rule 13. The court also considered similar judgments from the High Courts of Patna and Calcutta, which supported the inclusion of machinery and equipment in the registration certificate.

On the other hand, the State argued that the registration certificate issued under Rule 5(1) of CST (R&T) Rules, 1957 cannot be amended to include articles not part of the original contract. They contended that items like trucks and cranes are not directly involved in construction and thus should not be included.

Conclusion:

The court found that the authorities had committed an error of law in rejecting the petitioner's application to include the articles. The court set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner and allowed the application under Section 8(3)(b) of the Act, 1956, making the amendment effective from the date of the application.

With the aforesaid observations, the petition was allowed.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates