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

1968 Supreme(Cal) 15

D.BASU
INDO IMPEX LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN PROKASH SIRKAR, B.C.Dutt, B.R.JHUNJHUNWALA

D. BASU, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 25th February, 1961, passed by respondent No. 2 (Assistant Commissioner), which is at annexure H, directing a fresh assessment and the fresh order of assessment made by respondent No. 1 (Commercial Tax Officer) on 27th October, 1964 (annexure I to the petition), in pursuance of the aforesaid direction.

( 2 ) THOUGH the petition has become somewhat clumsy after amendment, the substance of the petitioner's case is that the agreement at annexure A by which the petitioner-company contracted with the Calcutta Corporation to instal certain electric lamp posts, constituted an indivisible works contract and did not include any separate contract to supply materials so as to be assessable to sales tax On the value of the materials so supplied. The facts of the case are as follows :

( 3 ) IN pursuance of an invitation for tender from the Calcutta Corporation for the installation of electric lamps on its streets, the petitioner submitted its tender and entered into the agreement at annexure A and executed that contract. For the assessment year 1957-58, the petitioner submitted its return



















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top