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

2007 Supreme(SC) 677

2007(5) Supreme 324
Supreme Court of India
S.B. Sinha & Markandey Katju, JJ.
State of Jharkhand and others — Appellants
versus
Voltas Ltd, East Singhbhum — Respondent
Appeal (civil) 2408 of 2007
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.19327 of 2006)
Decided on : 09-05-2007

Important point
When the law provided that something is to be prescribed in the rules then that thing must be prescribed in the rules to make the provisions workable and constitutionally valid.

Headnote:Bihar Sales Tax Act – Section 21(as amended) – Bihar Sales Tax Rules – Rule 13A(As amended) - Taxable turnover in case of a works contract to be computed after deduction of amount of labour and any other charges as prescribed under rules – Respondent company engaged in execution of works contract of designing, supplying Installation, fabrication, testing and commissioning of air conditioning parts – Assessing authority held that material supplied in execution of works contracts only were liable to be taxed – However levy of uniform rate of tax @ 16% by sales tax authorities holding that incidence of tax was commensurate with actual transfer of property took place in execution of works contract - Although respondent had deposited with appellant entire amount of sales tax charged and demanded @ 16%, it passed on to its customers sales tax restricted to rate of 8% - While interpreting amended Section 21(1) and newly substituted Rule 13A Division Bench of Patna High Court held in case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. vs. State of Bihar that when law provided that something is to be prescribed in rules then that thing must be prescribed in rules to make the provisions workable and constitutionally valid – It is not merely labour charges which are deductible from value of works contract, but all other charges/amounts also, except value of goods sold in execution of works contract - This is because only value of the goods sold can be taxed as sales tax - No infirmity found in impugned judgment – Appeal dismissed. (Paras 12,13,18)

       134 STC 354, (1993) 88 STC 204. relied upon.

       Bihar Sales Tax Act – Section 21(as amended) – Bihar Sales Tax Rules – Rule 13A(As amended) - Principles as to what could be taxed in a works contract – Court in Gannon Dunkerley and Co. & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors specified principles as to what could be taxed in a works contract – Held value of goods involved in execution of a works contract will have to be determined after taking into account value of entire works contract and deducting there from charges towards labour and services. (Para 8)

       (1993) 1 SCC 364 relied upon.

       Facts of the case :

       Respondent company herein in the instant case was engaged in execution of works contract of designing, supplying Installation, fabrication, testing and commissioning of air conditioning parts. Assessing authority held that material supplied in execution of works contracts only were liable to be taxed. However uniform rate of tax @ 16% was levied by sales tax authorities holding that incidence of tax was commensurate with actual transfer of property that took place in execution of works contract.

       Issue in consideration in present case was regarding computation of Taxable turnover in case of a works contract.

       Findings of the Court :

       Relying upon decision in case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. vs. State of Bihar, Court held that even though Constitutional provision of law stated in present case that particular deductions would be provided. However unfortunately nothing was provided in relation to other charges either in section 21 itself or in rules framed in exercise of powers conferred by section 58 of Bihar Finance Act. Sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of section 21(1) read with rule 13A of Rules did not make sub-clause (1) fully workable because manner and extent of deduction relating to any other charges had not been provided prescribed by State. It is not merely labour charges which are deductible from value of works contract, but all other charges/amounts also, except value of goods sold in execution of works contract. This is because only value of goods sold can be taxed as sales tax. No infirmity was found in impugned judgment. Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

MARKANDEY KATJU, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.This appeal by special leave has been filed against the impugned judgment & order 22.6.2006 of the Jharkhand High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 482, 467, 493 and 466 of 2005.

3.Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

4.The respondent, a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 is engaged inter alia in the execution of works contracts of designing, supplying, installation, fabrication, testing and commissioning of air-conditioning plants. The assessing authority acknowledged that the contracts in question were works contracts and the material supplied in the execution of the works contracts only are liable to be taxed. However, the Sales Tax Authorities had sought to levy a uniform rate of tax @ 16% holding that in the instant case the incidence of tax is commensurate with actual transfer of property that takes place in the execution of works contract.

5.Although the respondent had deposited with the appellant the entire amount of the sales tax charged and demanded @ 16%, it passed on to its customers sales tax restricted to the rate of 8% because in terms of the Circular letter No. 3971 dated 18.5.1984 issued by the Government of Bihar, Finance (Commercial Tax) Department (Annexure P-4 of the affidavit on behalf of the respondent with additional documents), the appellant was entitled to charge sales tax only @ 8%.

6.In State of Madras vs. Gannon Dunkerley & Co. (Madras),1 [(1959) SCR 379], this Court held that the State legislature cannot impose sales tax on a works contract because a works contract is an indivisible contract whereas sales tax can only be imposed on a sale. The Court held that a works contract is not a sale.

7.Parliament, thereafter amended the Constitution of India by the Constitution (Forty Sixth) Amendment Act, 1982 introducing clause 29A (b) in Article 366 therein. The aforesaid clause 29-A states that the words “tax on the sale or purchase of goods” include inter alia “(b) a tax on the transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of a works contract”.

8.In Gannon Dunkerley and Co. & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors,2 [(1993) 1 SCC 364], this Court specified the principles as to what could be taxed in a works contract. In paragraph 47 of the judgment it has been observed that the value of the goods involved in the execution of a works contract will have to be determined after taking into account the value of the entire works contract and deducting therefrom the charges towards labour and services which would cover —

(a)Labour charges for execution of the works;

(b)Amount paid to a sub-contractor for labour and services;

(c)Charges for planning, designing and architect’s fees;

(d)Charges for obtaining on hire or otherwise machinery and tools used for the execution of the works contract;

(e)Cost of consumables such as water, electricity, fuel, etc. used in the execution of the works contract the property in which is not transferred in the course of execution of a works contract; and

(f)Cost of establishment of the contractor to the extent it is relatable to supply of labour and services;

(g)Other similar expenses relatable to supply of labour and services;

(h)Profit earned by the contractor to the extent it is relatable to supply of labour and services”.

The value of these items, therefore, have to be deducted from the value of the entire works contract, because what can be taxed is only on the sale of goods and not anything else. The State legislature under Entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule can tax only on the sale or purchase of goods. If an item does not come within List II or List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, then it can only be the Central legislature i.e. the Parliament which can levy tax either under List I or under the residual provision contained in Article 248 thereof.

9.Section 21 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, as amended states :

“Sec. 21. - Taxable Tur















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