2013 (10) TMI 538

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in levying tax in respect of the goods involved in the execution of works contract, which are purchased in the course of inter state sales? (ii) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal is right in confirming the levy of penalty under Section 22(2) of the TNGST Act? 2. The assessee/petitioner herein is a dealer in diesel engine generators and they are carrying on the job work of erection and commissioning of diesel engine generators. It is seen from the facts narrated that the assessee had a work contract with the Telecommunication department, Government of India for supply, installation, testing, commissioning of diesel generat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erials. The assessee had also undertaken supply on fixing up of exhaust pipes, fuel pipes and thermal installation, over spread relay etc. In the circumstances, the First Appellate Authority found that after allowing 30% towards labour charges, taxable turnover determined by the Assessing Officer was correct. Apart from that, the First Appellate Authority, while considering the claim of the assessee for exemption under Section 3(B) (2-a), held that when the assessee had not produced any proof to the effect that they purchased the entire materials involved in the execution of works contract from outside the State, the question of grant of exemption did not apply. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee was rejected. 4. Aggrieved by this, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s from other States only for the purpose of job work undertaken by them with the Telecommunication department. In the circumstances, there was absolutely no material to substantiate the claim for deduction under Section 3-B (2-a) and the same was rightly rejected by the authorities concerned. We do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal in this regard. 6. As far as the levy of penalty under section 22(2) is concerned, admittedly the assessee charged sales tax at 12% as against 4% on sales to the Government department. Thus, the Tribunal held that the levy of penalty was in accordance with the provisions of law. In the circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X