9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brought from outside the State by the contractee from the contractor. Application dismissed. - STREV No. 125 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 11-4-2022 - DR. S. MURALIDHAR CHIEF JUSTICE AND R. K. PATTANAIK, JUDGE Petitioner: Mr. Sunil Mishra, Addl. Standing Counsel Opposite Party: Mr. S.P. Sarangi, Advocate ORDER 1. This is a petition by the State under Section 24(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (OST Act) praying for a direction to the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal (Tribunal) to refer the following questions of law for opinion of this Court along with a statement of the case: 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the learned Sales Tax Tribunal is correct in law in coming to the conclusion that:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jamshedpur for and on behalf of M/s. IPITATA Sponge Iron Plant Ltd., Biliepada in Orissa for designing, engineering, manufacturing, supply erection and commissioning of equipments for the materials handling system for IPITATA Sponge Iron Steel Plant. The question that arose before the Sales Tax Officer (STO) was whether this entire transaction was in the nature of an inter-state sale as claimed by the Assessee and therefore not amenable to tax under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (OST Act) or was it an intra-state sale? 3. The STO, by the assessment order dated 29th August, 1987 for the year 1985-86, came to the conclusion that on examination of the conditions attached to the agreement between the parties that it can be safely concluded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccepted, since it was held that these get merged with the cost of the goods. It was however held that deduction of ₹ 3,42,200/- towards the labour charges allowed by the STO to arrive at the materials involved in the fabrication and erection work appeared low. Consequently, 65% of the total bill amount of ₹ 11,40,686/-, which worked out to ₹ 7,41,445/- was allowed as labour charges. 6. The Opposite Party then went in appeal before the Tribunal which analysed the clauses of the agreement in great detail. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the impugned transactions come within the purview of inter-state sale under Section 3(e) of the Central Sales Tax Act (CST Act) and outside the tax net under the O.S.T. Act. It wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
