9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. Mr. Sameer Parekh, Adv. Mr. Sarand Ramakrishnan, Adv.Ms. Rukmini Bobde, Adv. for M/s. Parekh Co., Advs. For the Petitioner. Mr. T.L.V. Iyer, Sr.Adv. Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Adv. Mr. A. Roben Singh, Adv. for the Respondent. ORDER 1. This matter arises on the provisions of Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. 2. On 4 th October, 2005, notice under Section 29(1)(e) and 29(2)(e) of Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, came to be issued. It was addressed to the petitioner M/s Larsen Toubro Limited. It was alleged that the petitioner is engaged in property development involving construction and building of flats and subsequent sale thereof. By a separate statement details of sale of flats was given. Those sales relate to the period 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of a works contract; (iii) a delivery of goods on hire-purchase or any system of payment by instalments; (iv) a transfer of the right to use any goods for any purpose (whether or not for a specified period) for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration." 4. We also quote hereinbelow the definition of the word `contract' vide Section 2(v-i): "Section 2(v-i): "works contract" includes any agreement for carrying out for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration, the building, construction, manufacture, processing, fabrication, erection, installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair or commissioning of any mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the owner, the developer and the prospective flat buyer. The question which arises for determination in this case is whether the petitioner Company herein had entered into a Tripartite Agreement to construct flats on its own behalf or on behalf of Dinesh Ranka or on behalf of the prospective flat purchaser. The Department relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Raheja Development's case (supra) and has taken the position that the petitioner Company had constructed the flats on behalf of the prospective flat buyers. In this case the Department has placed reliance essentially on Para 20 of the judgment in Raheja Development's case which reads as under: "Thus the appellants are undertaking to build as de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he works contract. Thirdly, in the Show Cause Notice there is no allegation made by the Department that there is monetary consideration involved in the first contract which is the Development Agreement. 9. Be that as it may, apart from the disputes in hand, the point which we have to examine is whether the ratio of the judgment of the Division Bench in the case of Raheja Development Corporation (supra) as enunciated in Para 20, is correct. If the Develop Agreement is not a works contract could the Department rely upon the second contract, which is the Tripartite Agreement and interpret it to be a works contract, as defined under the 1957 Act. The Department has relied upon only the judgment of this Court in Raheja Development Corp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
