9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 547X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h only that portion of the assessment order levying tax on the value of the steel involved in the execution of works contract at 10 per cent which is the rate applicable to civil works contract as per entry 6 of the Sixth Schedule of the Act as it is contended though steel being a declared goods within the meaning of section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and notified as such and having regard to the provisions of section 5B read with section 5(4) of the Act, this part of the goods involved in the execution of the works contract, namely, value of the steel which has gone into the execution of works contract could have been taxed only at four per cent, the rate as is mentioned at entry 2 of the Fourth Schedule to the Act which Schedule provides the rate at which declared goods are to be subjected to tax. This is the only bone of contention as between the petitioner-assessee and the Revenue and in terms of the assessment order, the assessing officer having taken the view that the steel having gone into the execution of the works contract, was of the view as the tax was being levied under section 5B of the Act, the request of the assessee concerned to levy the tax on iron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the rate is as indicated in the Fourth Schedule to the Act in respect of such goods and not at any other rate in any other provision of law. Section 5B and section 5(4) read as under: 5B. Levy of tax on transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of works contracts. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) or sub-section (3C) of section 5, but subject to sub-section (4), (5) or (6) of the said section, every dealer shall pay for each year, a tax under this Act on his taxable turnover of transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of works contract mentioned in column (2) of the Sixth Schedule at the rates specified in the corresponding entries in column (3) of the said Schedule. 5. Levy of tax on sale or purchase of goods. . . . (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 5B or section 5C, a tax under this Act shall be levied in respect of the sale or purchase of any of the declared goods mentioned in column (2) of the Fourth Schedule at the rate and only at the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds which are not otherwise taxable and the Supreme Court also having indicated in the case of Builders Association of India v. Union of India reported in [1989] 73 STC 370 that the limitation under the Constitution on the State Legislature to levy tax as imposed under article 286 of the Constitution of India continue to operate and therefore the levy of tax under the State enactment being further subject to the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the same having been recognised and given effect to in terms of section 5(4) of the Act, the provisions of section 5B also making a provision to yield the levy of tax under section 5B itself to section 5(4) which in turn is to bring the entire legislation to be in consonance with the requirement of article 286 of the Constitution of India, submits that the levy of tax under section 5B of the Act on goods like steel which is a declared goods can only be at four per cent and therefore to this extent, the assessment order is bad. Sri T.K. Vedamurthy, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, while has raised the preliminary objection about the tenability of the writ petition, which I am of the view, ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titled to the benefit of the rate of tax as is available to a declared goods under the Fourth Schedule of the Act. This becomes very clear in paragraph 14 of the said decision which reads as under: 14. It is not in dispute nor it can be disputed by both sides that a contract had been awarded to the petitioner for construction of a bridge. For that purpose the dealer/contractor has purchased iron and steel and has utilised the same for the purpose of construction of the bridge. Iron and steel purchased by him are used not in the same form as iron and steel but are used for the purpose of construction of a bridge. Therefore, liability of the dealer would squarely come under entry No. 6 of the Sixth Schedule to the Act. Keeping this aspect of the matter in view, the Tribunal has accepted the reasoning of the revisional authority while confirming the order passed by the revisional authority. In the present case, it is the definite contention of the petitioner and as canvassed by Sri T.N. Keshavamurthy, learned counsel for the petitioner that the iron and steel has been used in the construction of the building and not by converting it to any other form, much less, to a form w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
