High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATASWAMI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABDUL HADI
State of Tamil Nadu - Appellant
Versus
Aparajitha Rubbers Private Limited - Respondents
Tax Case Nos. 949, 950 and 952 of 1987
Decided On : 08 August 1990
Sales Tax - Rubber Lining Contract - Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971, Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1970 - 1981 (48) STC 521 (Mad.), 1974 (3) CTR 255, 1974 AIR(SC) 2309, 1975 (35) STC 24, 1975 (3) SCC 424, 1975 (2) SCR 372, 1974 TaxLR 2444, 1974 CTR(SC) 255 (SC), State v. Madras Industrial Lining Ltd. (T.C. Nos. 1208 to 1214 of 1979), Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Guntur Tobaccos Ltd. 1965 AIR(SC) 1396, 1965 (16) STC 240, 1965 (2) SCR 167 SC), Jariwala and Bros. v. State of Gujarat 1965 (16) STC 942 (Guj), State of Gujarat v. Kailash Engineering Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. 1967 AIR(SC) 547, 1967 (19) STC 13, 1967 (1) SCR 543 (SC), Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v. State of Karnataka 1984 AIR(SC) 744, 1984 (1) CompLJ 157, 1984 (55) STC 314, 1983 (2) Scale 1090, 1984 (1) SCC 706, 1984 (2) SCR 248, 1984 UJ 789, 1984 TaxLR 2822 (SC) - The court discussed the disputed turnover of rubber lining contract and its taxability under the relevant acts. It distinguished previous judgments and applied legal principles from various cases to determine the nature of the contract as a works contract and not a sale.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved tax revision cases against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal related to the disputed turnover of rubber lining contract, assessing whether it constituted sales exigible to tax under the relevant acts.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the disputed turnover of rubber lining contract was not a sale exigible to tax, but only a works contract, based on the nature of the contract and the absence of passing of property in the rubber lining to the customers.
Issues: The main issue was whether the disputed turnover of rubber lining contract constituted sales exigible to tax under the relevant acts or was only a works contract.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied legal principles from various cases to determine that the dominant object of the contract was only agreement to work for a stipulated consideration and there was no sale of the rubber content of the lining to the customer.
Final Decision: The tax revision cases were dismissed, and the disputed turnover of rubber lining contract was held not to be a sale exigible to tax, but only a works contract.
ABDUL HADI, J.
These tax revision cases are against the common order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Main Bench, Madras-104, dated December 9, 1986, in the Tribunal Appeal Nos. 463, 461 and 462 of 1985, respectively, relating to the same assessment year 1982-83. The first of the three relates to sales tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and the other two relate to consequent surcharge and additional sales tax therein under the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971 and Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1970, respectively.
2. The question involved in all these cases relates to the disputed turnover of Rs. 6, 52, 851 representing receipts towards rubber lining contract, which was brought to tax by the assessing officer as representing sales made by the respondent-assessee in all the three cases. The assessing officer rejected the claim of the assessee that it was only a works contract and resulted in so sales exigible to tax under the abovesaid enactments [prior to the amendment made to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, with effect from May 29, 1984, by Tamil Nadu Act 28 of 1984, consequent upon the Constitution (Forty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1982]. In the assessee's appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner only confirmed the assessment made. In its second appeal to the Tribunal, the latter set aside the assessment order relating to the said disputed turnover on the ground that the transaction was only a works contract and there were no sales. Hence, the State has filed these tax revision cases.
3. The assessee-company is a manufacturer of rubber goods and it also undertakes rubber lining of industrial equipments. The Tribunal set out in its order the nature of the business of the assessee and the process involved in the abovesaid rubber lining (as per the affidavit of the assessee's Director, Mr. Gangwal) which, as the Tribunal itself states, "are undisputed by the State".
"(a) The appellant effects outright sales of rubber components for which the components are manufactured according to specific drawings. On those sales, sales tax is charged and paid.
(b) The appellant-company undertakes rubber lining on the customers' industrial equipments like, pipes, vessels, storage tanks and other equipments which use corrosive chemical materials and to protect that costly equipment from such corrosion, rubber lining is done .......
(c) As soon as the enquiry is received, the matter is discussed with customers regarding the type of corrosive substance which the equipment is going to be put use of. Thereafter, the type of rubber lining is mutually discussed and agreed. For each category of job, the rubber linings have different properties having the suitable mix of rubber, input chemicals, which are suitably blended and compounded before preparing the rubber lining. The equipments are received at the factory of the appellant and always the rubber lining is blended, compounded and prepared only after the order is received. In other words, the rubber lining compound or sheet is not kept ready for use in the equipment from time to time but specifically prepared for each job then there as per the customers' specification;
(d) The raw rubber is suitably blended with rubber chemicals, in the rolling mixing mill to prepare appropriate lining sheets. Simultaneously the customers equipments surface is treated first by sand blasting (cleaning the surface of the metal to remove the dust and other foreign particles). Thereafter the surface is subjected to adhesive chemical coating and then the rubber lining is munually affixed on the surface of the metal and pressed by small hand roller to have a bonding with the metal. This is highly technical and skilled job, since any minor error makes the surface defective, with loose binding, air bubbles, pin-holes, etc., in lining sheet, which totally make the equipment useless for its purpose. After rubber lining sheet is put on the equipment it is thoroughly chec
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.