SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(SC) 414

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA
Decided on : December 16, 1983

Headnote:

Civil Appeal - Assessability of Appellant to Sales Tax - Special Leave - Taxability of Turnover - Whether sales effected in canteen by appellant were assessable to Sales Tax - Whether turnover apportioned from job works undertaken by appellant related to sales of materials by the appellant to Indian Air Force or other private parties, as case may be, and as such whether these were taxable as held by lower appellate authority - Whether, in case of job works undertaken from private parties mainly on quotation on inclusive-price-basis, Sales Tax authorities were right in apportioning a portion of the turnover as attributable towards sales of materials - Appellant is a manufacturer of spare parts and accessories of various aircrafts and has also established facilities for assembling, servicing, repairing, overhauling of aircrafts, their instruments and accessories - Sales Tax Authorities sought to subject to tax that proportion of total turnover of appellant for relevant years in question which was equivalent to the money value of spare parts to aircrafts which appellant supplied to Indian Air Force as a result of their use in process of repairing, servicing and overhauling of aircrafts, their instruments and accessories which were sent to the appellant for the aforesaid purposes during relevant years in question – Held, Court held that there was no possibility of any other materials to be used for the construction as would be manifest from the affidavit and the correspondence and invoices, and works orders in these transactions. Emphasis was placed before the Tribunal as well as before High Court of Karnataka on the case where the court was concerned with bus bodies - In the bus bodies case, assessee contractor had continued to have ownership rights and it was held that the bus body had to be transferred from the contractor to the other party as a result of contract for sale but in instant case it is manifest that specified spares and materials were not properties of the contractor, in sense that the contractor never had any ownership over these - Conclusion arrived at by us is in consonance with principles laid down by this Court - We are of the opinion that High Court of Karnataka was not right in its conclusion on taxability of the turnover of spare parts and materials supplied in execution of appellants job works - As a result except for the item on canteen sales which is not in dispute before us, these appeals are allowed - Necessary adjustments in the assessments should be made. In the facts and circumstances of these cases, the parties will bear their own costs throughout - Appeals allowed.

Judgment

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI

( 1 ) THESE appeals by special leave are from the judgment and decision of the High Court of Karnataka dated 1/12/1976 involving the questions of assessability of the appellant to Sales Tax, Central as well as State. While granting leave, this Court excluded the question whether the sales effected in the canteen by the appellant were assessable to Sales Tax. By the impugned judgment, the High Court of Karnataka had dismissed several Writ Petitions against several orders being S. T. R. Ps. Nos. 28, 27 and 29 of 1975 under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, for the years 1960-61, 1961-62 and 1962-63 respectively and also three others namely, S. T. R. Ps. Nos. 25,26 and 24 of 1975, under the Central Sales Tax Act for the corresponding years respectively, at the instance of the present appellant. These involved common questions of law and facts and were disposed of by a common judgment. We also propose to do the same. As stated, one of the questions was about the taxability of the turnover in respect of the sales made in the canteen of the appellant company. This question is not before us. Before the Tribunal, the two following questions relevant for appeals before us were agitated namely;

(I) Whether the turnover apportioned from the job works undertaken by the appellant related to the sales of materials by the appellant to the Indian Air Force or other private parties, as the case may be, and as such whether these were taxable as held by the lower appellate authority.

(II) Whether, in the case of job works undertaken from the private parties mainly on quotation on inclusive-price-basis, the Sales Tax authorities were right in apportioning a portion of the turnover as attributable towards sales of materials.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the controversy in these appeals, it is necessary to state certain facts. The appellant is a manufacturer of spare parts and accessories of various aircrafts and has also established facilities for assembling, servicing, repairing, overhauling of aircrafts, their instruments and accessories. The Sales Tax Authorities sought to subject to tax that proportion of the total turnover of the appellant for the relevant years in question which was equivalent to the money value of the spare parts to the aircrafts which the appellant supplied to the Indian Air Force as a result of their use in the process of repairing, servicing and overhauling of the aircrafts, their instruments and accessories which were sent to the appellant for the aforesaid purposes during the relevant years in question.

( 3 ) AT the outset, it is important to emphasise that the jobs done by the appellant were servicing, assembling, repairing and overhauling air Force Planes entrusted to the appellant. In the second appeal being Civil Appeal No. 1387 (NT) of 1977, the main job done was assembling; sales tax was levied in respect of the turnover for doing the same job. These works were done on the basis of contracts or job orders issued from time to time. While no contract directly concerning the repairing, servicing and overhauling of a specified air- craft, instrument or accessory in which the spare parts had been used in the execution of service contracts was on record, there is, however, a specimen contract that was entered into between the appellant and I. A. F. being agreement dated 23/06/1951, hereinafter referred to as 1951 Contract. The agreement is described as "contract for the flight servicing and maintenance of the H. Q. Training Command I. A. F. Communication Flight". The agreement was between Hindustan Aircraft Limited, described in the agreement as the contractor and the President of India, described in the agreement as the owner. It may be mentioned that the Hindustan Aircraft Limited has later on become the appellant i. e. M/s. Hindustan Aeronauties Limited. As the contentions of the parties on these appeals centered on the question whether the contracts in question, the income of which has been sub





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top