9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent(S): GP For Commercial Tax. ORDER PER: (HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR) The present writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 02.09.2009, passed by the 2nd respondent, levying penalty under Section 10 (A) of the CST Act, 1956 (in short, the Act). 2. The petitioner is a Registered Dealer on the rolls of the 2nd respondent, bearing TIN No. 28790264396, under the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... items were not mentioned in the registration certificate. As the petitioner is engaged in works contract, he is not eligible to purchase capital equipment against 'C' forms, inasmuch as there is no transfer of such goods in the execution of works contract. Furthermore, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes issued a circular dated 03.01.2008, indicating the same. 4. In furtherance thereof, the 2nd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel for the petitioner would contend that the Hydraulic Excavator and Soil Compactor were purchased by the petitioner for the purpose of executing works contract and the same should be treated as capital goods, inasmuch as works contract involve civil constructions, earth digging and laying of bunds or roads, involving the usage of usage of Hydraulic Excavator. Therefore, the petitioner is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot to have invoked Section 10 (A) of the Act. 8. On perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the petitioner filed 'Nil' returns from April 2007 to February 2008, i.e., till the cancellation of registration. However, the petitioner made purchases of a Hydraulic Excavator on 28.06.2007 and 31.08.2007, indicating that the machinery was not used for the specified purposes. Thereby the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
