9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rks contract, is sustainable in law? HELD THAT:- Insofar as the applicability of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Act to such contracts is concerned, the issue has been dealt with and decided by an earlier decision of this Court in M/s Comfort Systems Vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax, U.P. [ 2019 (2) TMI 924 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ] where it was held that - The order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained, inasmuch as, the Tribunal has clearly applied the exact opposite rule. Therefore, the matter is remitted to the Tribunal. Since the matter is being sent back to the Tribunal, no further observation is required to be made, as to the merits of the claim or as to the other finding recorded by the Tribunal that the goods had been purchased by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of goods brought inside the State of U.P. by way of inter-State purchase for execution of works contract, is sustainable in law? 5. Briefly, during the assessment year in question, the assessee had engaged in execution of electrical works contract awarded by four contractees, namely, Mela Hotels Ltd., Ghaziabad; Steel Authority of India Ltd., Kanpur; Somdutt Plaza, Kanpur and; Ocean Complex, Noida. 6. Undisputedly, the assessee imported goods from outside the State. It is the assessee's case that such import was made only for the purpose of execution of the aforesaid four works contract awarded to it and the goods so imported had been supplied solely to those contractees. 7. In such facts, it claimed benefit of Section 3-F(2)(b)(i) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be claimed by the assessee only if it had executed the works contract outside the State and had exported the goods from inside the State of U.P. to outside. 11. After applying such principle, the Tribunal has rejected the claim made by the assessee. 12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears, insofar as the applicability of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Act to such contracts is concerned, the issue has been dealt with and decided by an earlier decision of this Court in M/s Comfort Systems Vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax, U.P., (2019) 64 GSTR 151 , wherein it has been held as below: 19. That being the governing principle, the language of Rule 9(1)(e) of the Rules relied upon by the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he works contract document, it would make no difference to the eligibilty to deduction claimed by the assessee under Rule 9(1)(e) of the Rules, on deemed inter-state sale arising upon transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of the works contract. On the findings recorded by the Tribunal, the goods in question had been moved from outside the State solely by reason of the pre-existing works contract and those goods had been applied only solely the execution of that works contract. Therefore, the deemed sale of goods arose, only by way of inter-state sale as the movement of goods was occasioned by the prior contract of sale, namely the works contract. 13. Tested on that Rule, the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained, inasm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
