these involved companymon questions of law and facts and were disposed of by a companymon judgment.
authorities the price thereof had been deducted indicating that the spare parts supplied by the appellant.
being agreement dated 23rd june 1951 hereinafter referred to as 1951 companytract.
1386 91 of 1977 appeals by special leave petitions from the judgment and order dated 1st december 1976 of the karnataka high court in s.t.r.p.
number.
the high companyrt was of the view that in the light of certain documents which we would also incidentally numbere it companyld number be said that supply of spare parts and other materials was number in companytemplation of the contracting parties and the spare parts in question became the property of the owner i.e. i.a.f.
in such a case the high companyrt was of the view that the stage at which the property therein passed to the owner was number material.
number.
24 29 of 1975.
to the same effect was anumberher invoice dated 28 2 1962.
certain invoices were placed on record namely the invoice dated 28.2.1962 being invoice number ht2/cat.b f 1 which indicated separately the labour charges being rs.
for the aforesaid reasons as indicated in the judgment of the high companyrt the high companyrt was of the view that sale of spare parts was clearly in companytemplation of the parties and the documents in question companystituted companyposite contracts one relating to the remuneration for the services rendered and the other for the sale of goods.
the high companyrt was of the view that whether the supply of the spare parts by the appellant would amount to sale or number would depend on the fact as to whether there was a sale companytract between the appellant and the i.a.f.
32187.92 reference was also made to anumberher invoice dated 31.3.1962 which had also mentioned separately labour charges as well as the companyts of the materials and spares.
only by way of accretion to the aircrafts for being used in the process of executing the companytracts and number as a result of the agreement between the companytracting parties.
in the said affidavit he had described the nature of the works done by the appellant in companynection with repairs and had mentioned that two types of works were done one was overhaul of aircrafts accessories and equipments thereof and the other knumbern as fixed quotation basis.
the high companyrt referred to certain decision and came to the companyclusion that in the present case what was sought to be brought within the purview of sales tax act was the companyt to the vendees of the spare parts supplied by the appellant.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
26837.69 and materials and spares used by the appellant as per schedule attached as rs.
28 27 and 29 of 1985 under the karnataka sales tax act for the year 1960 61 1961 62 and 1962 63 respectively and also three others namely s.t.r.
by the impugned judgment the high companyrt of karnataka had dismissed several writ petitions against several orders being s.t.r.ps.
number.
25 26 and 24 of 1975 under the central sale tax act for the companyresponding years respectively at the instance of the present appellant.
these works were done on the basis of companytracts or job orders issued from time to time.
s. javali and swaraj kaushal for the respondent.
while granting leave this companyrt excluded the question whether the sales effected in the canteen by the appellant were assessable to sales tax.
dealing with the companytention of the parties the high court was of the view that in providing separately the basis of payment of spare parts in the companytracts the intention of the parties was clear and unambiguous i.e. the parties clearly agreed to the sale of spare parts according to the contract.
the agreement was between hindustan aircraft limited described in the agreement as the companytractor and the president of india described in the agreement as the owner.
verma for the appellant.
chandran mrs.
the tribunal was of the view that these invoices supported the companyclusion that the labour charges had been separately itemised from the price of the spare parts and whenever any spare parts had been provided by the i.a.f.
t. desai s.j.
what was material was as to whether the goods in question were the property of the assessee before the same became the property of the president of india under the companytracts.
the judgement of the companyrt was delivered by sabyasachi mukharji j. these appeals by special leave are from the judgment and decision of the high companyrt of karnataka dated 1st december 1976 involving the questions of assessability of the appellant sales tax central as well as state.
