9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 6(3)(i), would not only include the cost of acquisition of goods by the contractordealer but also the transportation charges incurred by him to deliver the goods to the situs of the works wherein they are incorporated; cost of establishment relatable to the supply of material involved in the execution of the works contract; other charges borne by the contractor-dealer in relation to these goods till its incorporation in the works; the profits relatable to the value of such goods; etc. However profits on the labour component of, and the actual cost of incorporation in, the works would stand excluded as the value of the goods is only its value till the stage of its incorporation in the works, and not thereafter. The deemed turnover under rule 6(3)(i), (liable to tax under the Act), would be more or less the same as determined under rule 6(2) of the Rules. Where books of accounts are separately maintained, for works contracts, each year ascertaining profits arising therefrom would present no difficulty. Unlike other components, the profit element in the value of the goods may necessitate estimation in cases where the books of accounts are not maintained annually, but project-wise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... profit percentage in the facts and circumstances of the case before him - As the law now declared by us would operate from the inception, and since the exercise of revisional jurisdiction under section 20(2) of the Act is in accordance with the construction placed by us on rule 6(3)(i), the jurisdictional bar under section 20(2A) will not apply - Decided in favour of Revenue. - Tax Revision Case Nos. 274 of 2001, 205 of 2003, 233 of 2010, 13287 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 25-11-2011 - RAO, RAMESH RANGANATHAN V.V.S. AND SANJAY KUMAR, JJ. For the Appellant : A.V. Krishna Kaundinya, Special SC for Commercial Taxes, For the Respondent : S. Dwarakanath, Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy, Shaik Jeelani Basha and P. Girish Kumar ORDER :- The order of the court was made by RAMESH RANGANATHAN J. In TREVC No. 233 of 2010 and batch, and W.P. No. 13287 of 2006 and batch, filed either by the assessees or the State, the scope and ambit of rule 6(3)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 (the APGST Rules) arises for consideration. When these cases were listed before a Division Bench it was also contended that the revisional proceedings initiated by the Jurisdictiona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the view that the petitioner was entitled for deduction under rule 6(2) in a sum of ₹ 6.71 crores only, and the remaining turnover of ₹ 6.21 crores was liable to tax under the Act. The petitioner filed their objections thereto. The Deputy Commissioner passed order dated December 19, 2008 confirming the levy. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT) contending that the works executed by them were spread over a period of more than one year; the taxable turnover could not, therefore, be computed under section 6(2) as it was rule 6(3)(i) which was applicable; and adoption of the theory of value of the material at the time of incorporation by the Deputy Commissioner was untenable. The STAT, in its order dated January 29, 2010, held that the petitioner's assessment was completed under rule 6 (3) (i) based on the purchase value of the goods used in the execution of the works contract; there was a difference between purchase value and purchase price ; since the expression used in rule 6(3)(i) is purchase value , the judgment of the Supreme Court in Gannon Dunkerley [1993] 88 STC 204 (SC) required the value of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e (29A) was inserted to article 366 by section 4 of the Constitution (Fortysixth Amendment) Act, 1982 which came into force with effect from April 2, 1983. Article 366(29A)(b) defines the expression tax on the sale or purchase of goods to include a tax on the transfer of property in goods, whether as goods or in some other form, involved in the execution of a works contract . Explanation VI added to the definition of sale in section 2(n) of the Act, by A.P. Act No. 18 of 1985 with effect from July 1, 1985, reads thus: Explanation VI.-Whenever any goods are supplied or used in the execution of a works contract, there shall be deemed to be a transfer of property in such goods, whether or not the value of the goods so supplied or used in the course of execution of such works contract is shown separately and whether or not the value of such goods or material can be separated from the contract for the service and the work done. Section 2(r) of the Act defines total turnover to mean the aggregate turnover in all goods of a dealer at all places of business in the State, whether or not the whole or any portion of such turnover is liable to tax, including the turnover of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e specified as applicable thereto effected in the State by the dealer selling them, on his turnover of sales in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover; (b) in the case of the goods mentioned in the Second Schedule, at the rates and only at the point of the purchase as specified as applicable thereto, effected in the State by the dealers purchasing them, on his turnover of purchase in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover; (c) in the case of the goods mentioned in the Fifth Schedule, at the rates and at the points specified as applicable thereto, on the turnover of the dealer in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover; (d) in the case of the goods mentioned in the Sixth Schedule, at the rates and at the points specified as applicable thereto, on the turnover of the dealer in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover. Section 5 was again amended by section 3 of the APGST (Amendment Act) 1989 with effect from March 30, 1989 as under: 5. Levy of tax on sales or purchases of goods.-(1) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every dealer s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of works contract. Notwithstanding anything contained in section 5 or section 6, every dealer shall pay a tax under this Act for each year, on his turnover of transfer of property in goods whether as goods or in some other form, involved in the execution of works contract, at the rate of six paise on every rupee of his turnover. The charge to tax, under section 5F of the Act, is on the turnover relating to the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of works contract. Rule 6(2) of the APGST Rules, 1957 was substituted, and sub-rule (3) was added by G.O. Ms. No. 244 Revenue dated May 17, 1995 with effect from April 1, 1995. The newly inserted rule 6(2), which details the manner in which the turnover liable to tax under section 5F of the Act is to be determined, reads as under: R. 6(2). Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), the tax under section 5F, shall be levied on the turnover of a dealer who transfers property in goods, whether as same goods or in some other form, involved in the execution of works contract. In determining the turnover of a dealer liable to tax, the amounts specified in clauses (a) to (l) shall, subject to the conditions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of goods involved in the execution of a works contract or the amounts referred at clauses (a) to (l) of subrule (2) in such contract are not ascertainable from the accounts of a dealer where under section 5H contractee is required to deduct tax at source, the turnover of the dealer for the purpose of section 5F or 5H, shall be determined after deducting the amount calculated at the following percentages for different types of contracts from the amounts paid or payable to the dealer for carrying out such contract; Even under the A.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2005 ( the VAT Act for short), the charge to tax is on the transfer of property in goods. Section 2(28) of the VAT Act defines sale to mean every transfer of property in goods, whether as such goods or in any other form, in pursuance of a contract or otherwise by one person to another in the course of trade or business, for cash, deferred payment, or for any other valuable consideration. Under Explanation VI thereto, whenever any goods are supplied or used in the execution of works contract, there shall be deemed to be a transfer of property in such goods. Section 4 of the VAT Act is the charging provision and, under sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be read harmoniously both with section 5F of the Act and rule 6(2) of the Rules. In Media Communications [1997] 105 STC 227 (AP), on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the assessees, the constitutional validity of sections 5F, 5G and 5H of the Act and the Rules made thereunder was under challenge, in a batch of writ petitions, before a Division Bench of this court. The validity of rule 6(3)(i) was put in issue contending that the first portion of the sub-rule imposed a tax on the value of the goods purchased for being supplied in the case of a contract which extended over a period of more than one year, even though it may not be ultimately used in the contract. It is in this context that the Division Bench observed (pages 255 and 256 in 105 STC): In W.P. No. 17415 of 1995, the validity of rule 6(3) and (4) questioned. As sub-rule (4) has already been omitted by G.O. Ms. No. 788, Revenue (CTII), September 21, 1996, the challenge has to be confined to rule 6(3). It was submitted that the first portion of this sub-rule imposes a tax on the value of the goods purchased for being supplied where the contract extends more than a year even though it may not be u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he value of the goods purchased and supplied or used in the execution of the works contract. It would include the value of the goods when it is supplied or used in the works contract, i.e., the value of the goods when it is incorporated in the works. When so read rule 6(3) (i) would also not be ultra vires section 5F of the Act whereunder the charge to tax is on the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of a works contract. In support of their contention that it is only the cost of acquisition of goods by a dealer from his vendor which is liable to tax under rule 6 (3) (i) learned counsel for the assessees would place reliance on certain observations of the Division Bench, in Media Communications [1997] 105 STC 227 (AP), which read thus (page 256 in 105 STC): . . . It must be remembered that in respect of the goods used in the execution of contracts, there is no sale price as such, and therefore, the turnover pertaining to the goods involved in the execution of the contract refers only to the purchase turnover. . . Relying on these observation, the STAT, in several of its orders, held that it is only the cost of acquisition of goods by the dealer which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the ratio of the decision, and not any finding of fact. It is the principle found out upon a reading of a judgment as a whole, in the light of the questions before the court, that forms the ratio and not any particular word or sentence. (Director of Settlements, A.P. v. M.R. Apparao [2002] 4 SCC 638). It is not a profitable task to extract a sentence here and there from a judgment and to build upon it. (State of Orissa v. Sudhansu Sekhar Misra AIR 1968 SC 647). There is always peril in treating the words of a judgment as though they were words in a legislative enactment. It is to be remembered that judicial utterances are made in the setting of the facts of a particular case. (Herrington v. British Railways Board [1972] 2 WLR 537). Observations, on matters not in issue in the case, are not meant to be and ought not to be regarded as laying down the law (K. Veeraswami v. Union of India [1991] 3 SCC 655). Observations of courts are neither to be read as Euclid's theorems nor as provisions of a statute, and that too taken out of their context. The observations must be read in the context in which they appear to have been stated. The judgments of courts are not to be construed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid goods is transferred to the works, i.e., value of goods at the stage of its incorporation in the works. With regards to the contention that it is the purchase value, and not the incorporated value, which is the measure of tax under rule 6(3)(i) it is necessary to note that the tax on transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of a works contract, falling within the ambit of article 366(29A)(b), is leviable on the goods involved in the execution of a works contract, and the value of the goods which are involved in execution of the works contract would constitute the measure for imposition of the tax. (Gannon Dunkerley [1993] 88 STC 204 (SC)). As the charge to tax under section 5F is on the transfer of property in goods, i.e., on the transfer of the right in goods, it is only the value of the goods involved in the execution of the works contract which would constitute the measure for imposition of tax, and not the purchase cost or the cost of acquisition of goods by the dealer. The taxable event is the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of a works contract, and the transfer of property in such goods tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thers, labour charges for the execution of works; rule 6(3)(i) requires only the value of the goods purchased and supplied or used in the execution of the works contract to be treated as the turnover. Since it is only the value of the goods which, under rule 6(3)(i), determines the turnover of a dealer, the cost of labour would not form part of the turnover unlike, under rule 6(2), where labour charges form part of the turnover of the dealer and is, therefore, required to be deducted for the purpose of arriving at the turnover liable to tax under section 5F of the Act. When so read rule 6(3)(i) cannot be said to have been unnecessarily made by the rule-making authority. II. Does the word purchase in rule 6(3)(i) require tax to be levied on the cost of the goods purchased by the assessee from his vendor and not on the value of goods incorporated in the works? It is contended on behalf of the assessees that the word purchased , as used in rule 6(3) (i), signifies the intention of the rule-making authority to levy tax on the value of goods purchased, and not to include any further amounts in the value, viz., profit on goods, incidental charges up to the stage of incorporation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group [2006] 3 SCC 434). Rules made for carrying out the purposes of the Act cannot be so framed as not to carry out the purpose of the Act, and cannot be in conflict therewith. (Laghu Udyog Bharati v. Union of India [2005] 1 VST 24 (SC); [1999] 115 STC 616 (SC); [1999] 6 SCC 418). If a rule goes beyond, or is contrary to, what the section contemplates, the rule must yield to the statute. (Central Bank of India v. Workmen [1959] 29 Comp Cas 367 (SC); [1960] 1 SCR 200). If the cost of acquisition of goods or the purchase cost of the goods is held to be the measure of tax under rule 6(3)(i), the said rule would not be in conformity either with section 5(1) read with Explanation VI to section 2(n) and section 2(s)(iii)(a)(i) of the Act, or section 5F of the Act, whereunder the charge to tax is on the transfer of property in the goods, i.e., the value of the goods when it is transferred to, or is incorporated in, the works. As the Rules have to be read harmoniously, and not to be in conflict, with the parent Act the construction placed on rule 6(3)(i), or the erstwhile rule 6(2)(iii), by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessees does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court in Gannon Dunkerley [1993] 88 STC 204 (SC) observed (pages 232 and 233 in 88 STC): On behalf of the contractors, it has been urged that under a law imposing a tax on the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of a works contract under entry 54 of the State List read with article 366(29A)(b), the tax is imposed on the goods which are involved in the execution of a works contract and the measure for levying such a tax can only be the value of the goods so involved and the value of the works contract cannot be made the measure for levying the tax. The submission is further that the value of such goods would be the cost of acquisition of the goods by the contractor and, therefore, the measure for levy of tax can only be the cost at which the goods involved in the execution of a works contract were obtained by the contractor. On behalf of the States, it has been submitted that since the property in goods which are involved in the execution of a works contract passes only when the goods are incorporated in the works, the measure for the levy of the tax would be the value of the goods at the time of their incorporation in the works as well as the cost of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er services from the value of the works contract. The charges for labour and services which are required to be deducted from the value of the works contract would cover (i) labour charges for execution of the works, (ii) amount paid to a sub-contractor for labour and services; (iii) charges for obtaining on hire, or otherwise, machinery and tools used for execution of the works contract; (iv) charges for planning, designing and architect's fees; (v) cost of consumables used in execution of the works contract; (vi) cost of establishment of the contractor to the extent it is relatable to supply of labour and services; (vii) other similar expenses relatable to supply of labour and services; and (viii) profit earned by the contractor to the extent it is relatable to supply of labour and services. (Gannon Dunkerley [1993] 88 STC 204 (SC)). In determining the turnover liable to tax under section 5F of the Act, rule 6(2) requires the gross receipts of a dealer to be subjected to the deductions under clauses (a) to (l) thereunder. The deductions under clauses (a) to (l) of rule 6(2) are similar to the deductions referred to in Gannon Dunkerley [1993] 88 STC 204 (SC). As the scope of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urposes of rule 6(3)(i), would not only include the cost of acquisition of goods by the contractordealer but also the transportation charges incurred by him to deliver the goods to the situs of the works wherein they are incorporated; cost of establishment relatable to the supply of material involved in the execution of the works contract; other charges borne by the contractor-dealer in relation to these goods till its incorporation in the works; the profits relatable to the value of such goods; etc. However profits on the labour component of, and the actual cost of incorporation in, the works would stand excluded as the value of the goods is only its value till the stage of its incorporation in the works, and not thereafter. The deemed turnover under rule 6(3)(i), (liable to tax under the Act), would be more or less the same as determined under rule 6(2) of the Rules. Where books of accounts are separately maintained, for works contracts, each year ascertaining profits arising therefrom would present no difficulty. Unlike other components, the profit element in the value of the goods may necessitate estimation in cases where the books of accounts are not maintained annually, bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an one year. A legal fiction is created only for some definite purpose. The fiction is to be limited to the purpose for which it was created, and should not be extended beyond that legitimate field. A legal fiction presupposes the existence of the state of facts which may not exist, and then works out the consequences which flow from that state of facts. Such consequences have got to be worked out only to their logical extent having due regard to the purpose for which the legal fiction has been created. Stretching the consequences beyond what logically follows amounts to an illegitimate extension of the purpose of the legal fiction. (Bengal Immunity Company Limited v. State of Bihar [1955] 6 STC 446 (SC); AIR 1955 SC 661, K. Prabhakaran v. P. Jayarajan [2005] 1 SCC 754). A legal fiction should not be extended beyond the language by which it is created. A deeming provision cannot be pushed too far so as to result in an anomalous or absurd position. (Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Ram Lal [2005] 2 SCC 638). The fiction enacted by the Legislature must be restricted by the plain terms of the statute. (Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shakuntala [1961] 43 ITR 352 (SC); AIR 1966 SC 719, Mancheri P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be heard to contend that it is rule 6(3) (i) or rule 6(2)(iii), as it originally stood, which should be applied and not the said rule as read down by the Division Bench in Media Communications [1997] 105 STC 227 (AP). The purpose of the legal fiction in rule 6(3)(i), even on its being read down consequent to the judgment in Media Communications [1997] 105 STC 227 (AP), is only to prescribe another method of arriving at the value of the goods supplied or used in the works contract, without following the circuitous route under rule 6(2) of deducting certain items of expenditure from the gross receipts paid or payable to the dealer. V. Would the doctrine of stare decisis necessitate the reference not being answered? It is contended on behalf of the assessees that, following the judgment in Media Communications [1997] 105 STC 227 (AP), the STAT, in Seven Hills Constructions v. State of Andhra Pradesh [2002] 34 APSTJ 201, had held that the turnover liable to tax is only the turnover of goods purchased by the dealer (purchase turnover of the material); it is only the purchase turnover of the goods, intended to be supplied or used in the works contract, which can be taxed u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of the goods at the time of incorporation that had to be considered for the purpose of levy of tax under rule 6(3) (i). This circular of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes is dated October 4, 2005, and it is evident therefrom that neither the Government nor its officers have reconciled themselves to the orders of the STAT holding the purchase cost of goods to be the measure of tax under rule 6(3)(i) of the Rules. While the STAT has no doubt taken the view, in several appeals, that the purchase cost of goods is the measure of tax under rule 6(3)(i) of the Rules, in several other appeals (for instance in T.A. No. 186 of 2009 against which TREVC No. 233 of 2010 has been preferred to this court by the assessee-dealer) it has held that it was the purchase value of goods, i.e., the value of goods at the stage of incorporation which was the measure of tax levied under section 5F of the Act. As the STAT has expressed conflicting opinions on the scope of rule 6(3)(i) it cannot be said that there is a settled decision of the STAT on the question referred to us. In State of Andhra Pradesh v. Navayuga Engineering Company Limited, Visakhapatnam [2007] 45 APSTJ 1, a Division Bench of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice. (Mishrilal [1999] 4 SCC 11). The doctrine of stare decisis is expressed in the maxim stare decisis et non quieta movere, which means to stand by decisions and not to disturb what is settled . The underlying logic of this doctrine is to maintain consistency and avoid uncertainty. The guiding philosophy is that a view which has held the field for a long time should not be disturbed only because another view is possible. (Shanker Raju [2011] 2 SCC 132; Waman Rao v. Union of India [1981] 2 SCC 362). Where two interpretations are reasonably possible on the question, the interpretation of a taxing statute which favours the assessee, and which has been acted upon and accepted by the Revenue for a long period, should not be disturbed except for compelling reasons. (Birla Cement Works [2001] 248 ITR 216 (SC); [2001] 9 SCC 35, Sneh Enterprises [2006] 7 SCC 714). Taking recourse to the doctrine of stare decisis would be an imperative necessity to avoid uncertainty and confusion. (Mishrilal [1999] 4 SCC 11). The binding effect of a decision does not depend upon whether a particular argument was considered therein or not, provided that the point with reference to which an argument ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... )(iii)(a)(i) of the Act defined turnover to include the value of goods determined by the assessing officer to have been used or supplied by the dealer in the course of execution of the works contract. The words value of goods were substituted, in section 2(s)(iii)(a)(i) of the Act, for the words cost of any goods with effect from August 1, 1986. Since section 5(1) of the Act, after amendment of section 2(s)(iii)(a)(i) with effect from August 1, 1986 and again as amended by section 3 of the APGST (Amendment Act), 1989, with effect from March 30, 1989, required every dealer to pay tax under the Act for each year on his turnover which, as noted hereinabove, included the value of the goods used or supplied in the execution of a works contract, it is only the value of the goods, when the property in the goods is transferred, i.e., at the stage of its incorporation in the works, which is the measure of tax, and not the cost of acquisition of goods by the contractor-dealer from his vendor. Under article 246(3), read with entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule and article 366(29A)(b), of the Constitution of India the State Legislature can only make a law for levy of tax on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s [2004] 136 STC 586 (AP) [FB]; the Supreme Court, in C.A. No. 302 of 2003 and batch dated August 9, 2011 (Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Indo National Ltd. [2012] 49 VST 161 (SC)), had affirmed the said decision of the Full Bench of this court; the interpretation of rule 6(3)(i) by the STAT, following the view expressed by this court in Media Communications [1997] 105 STC 227 (AP), operates as a jurisdictional bar on the exercise of revisional power under section 20(2); the assessing officer completed assessment under rule 6(2); while the Appellate Deputy Commissioner directed assessment under rule 6(3)(i), surprisingly the Joint Commissioner, without disturbing the finding that the execution of the works had spread beyond one year, had restored the order of the Commercial Tax Officer as if the assessment was under rule 6(2) by taking the value of the goods purchased, and by adding all expenses incurred till the time of incorporation in the works. The law laid down by the Full Bench in Indo National Limited [2004] 136 STC 586 (AP) is that, if the question or issue is of a fact, the same may be confined to that particular order but, if the issue or question related to a poi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expound the old one . In other words, Judges do not make law, they only discover or find the correct law. The law has always been the same. If a subsequent decision alters the earlier one, it (the later decision) does not make new law. It only discovers the correct principle of law which has to be applied retrospectively. To put it differently, even where an earlier decision of the court operated for quite some time, the decision rendered later on would have retrospective effect clarifying the legal position which was earlier not correctly understood. (Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. [2008] 305 ITR 227 (SC); [2008] 14 SCC 171). The theory of case law is that a judge does not make law; he merely declares it; and the overruling of a previous decision is a declaration that the supposed rule never was law. Hence any intermediate transactions made on the strength of the supposed rule are governed by the law established in the overruling decision. The overruling is retrospective, except as regards matters that are res judicata or accounts that have been settled in the meantime. (Salmond on Jurisprudence; Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arge to tax under the provisions of the Act is similar to the provisions in the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, i.e., on the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of works contract, the law laid by the Supreme Court in Gannon Dunkerley [1993] 88 STC 204 (SC) would equally apply to the provisions of the Act, and the Rules made thereunder; (8) A fortiori the value of goods under rule 6 (3) (i) would not only include the cost of acquisition of goods by the contractor-dealer but also the transportation charges incurred by him to deliver the goods to the situs of the works wherein they are incorporated; cost of establishment relatable to supply of material involved in the execution of the works contract; other charges borne by the contractor-dealer in relation to these goods till its incorporation in the works; and the profits relatable to the value of such goods; (9) Unlike other components, the profit element in the value of the goods may necessitate estimation in cases where the books of accounts are not maintained annually, but project-wise. Estimation of profit would then be a matter for determination by the assessing authority after taking into consideration all r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
