9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing authority has been quashed. Brief facts of the revision are that certain construction work was assigned by the Union of India through its agency, Central Public Works Depart ment to the contractors and for the purpose of construction various contractors were supplied certain materials as per terms and conditions of the contract such as cement, etc. The controversy with regard to question of supply of the material for the purpose of construction to the contractors by the CPWD can be treated to be sale or not was finally adjudicated by the Supreme Court in bunch of civil appeals filed by the Karya Palak Engineer, C.P.W.D., Bikaner v. Rajasthan Taxation Board decided on August 12, 2004, reported in [2004] 136 STC 641 (SC); Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 STC 641 (SC) ; Tax Up-Date Vol. IX Pt. 8 confirmed the order of the assessing authority so far it relates to tax but quashed the order of interest and penalty and remitted the matter to the assessing authority for deciding the question of interest from the date of judgment of the apex court which is August 12, 2004 ; and, for the purpose of penalty imposed under section 61 of the Act of 1994 it has been held that the said penalty has not been imposed in accordance with law, therefore, set aside the order of penalty imposed under section 61 and further upheld the penalty imposed under section 59 by the assessing authority. Said judgment passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpurs was appealed against both by the petitioner and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the courts below have committed error while quashing interest and penalty part of the assessment order which has been assessed by the assessing authority because the respondent was under obligation to pay tax as and when it became due. I have considered the rival submissions made by both the parties. It is true that the apex court has held that material supplied by the Department of the Union of India shall be treated to be sale but this verdict was given on August 12, 2004. Therefore, after the judgment, it was the duty of the petitioner-Department to pass order within time. Admittedly, the assessment order was passed by the assessing authority on March 1, 2007, therefore, in my opinion, both the courts below have rightly upheld th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
