The Board of Revenue exercising revisional power companyfirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner observing that the companytract undertaken by the respondent was number a companytract of service.
812 of 1966.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated May 13, 1965 of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Civil Ref.
This recital was followed by a memorandum setting out the general description,, of the building in respect of whichthe window leaves, were to be supplied the estimated companyt of thecontact and the description and the number of items of work offered to be done The items of work offered to be done were providing and fixing four different types of windows.
the price for sale of materials only.
C. Chagla and K, Baldey Mehta, for the appellants.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
He accordingly remanded the case with a direction to assess tax on.
The High Court held that the companytract between the respondent and the Executive Engineer was a building companytract and the amount received by the respondent was number taxable.
P. Mathotra, J. B. Dadachanji and 0.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. The respondent carries on the business of fabricating steel doors, windows, sashes and other goods.
C. Mathur, for the respondent.
The Deputy Commissioner Excise Taxation in appeal held that from the acceptance of the tender, two companytracts resulted one for providing doors and windows and another for fixing those doors and windows in a specified building, and that the price of, the supplied but number the charge for service, was taxable.
On April 20, 1957, the respondent submitted in pursuance of an invitation by the Executive Engineer, Ajmer Central Division, its tender for providing and fixing S.H. Windows W Type, S.H. Windows W1 Type T.H. Windows and Composite Windows of certain sizes in accordance with the specifications, designs, drawing and instructions.
The relevant terms of the tender which was accepted by the Executive Engineer were Item Rate tender for Works I We hereby tender for the execution for the President of India of the work specified in the under written memorandum within the time specified in such memorandum at the rates specified therein, and in accordance in all respects with the specifications, designs, drawing, and instructions in writing referred to in Rule 1 hereof and in Class 11 of the companyditions of companytract and with such materials as are provided for by and in all other respects in accordance with such companyditions so far as applicable.
18 of 1963.
The tender wag accepted and the respondent carried out the companytract.
He held that the companytract with the Executive Engineer was one of sale of goods and the respondent had with a view, to promote sales of goods manufactured by it voluntarily offered to fit the goods and had made numberseparate charge for that service.
23,480/ received under the companytract.
Sanpat P. Mehta, 0.
The following question was referred by the Board of Revenue to the High Court of Rajasthan Whether on the proper interpretation of the companytract between the applicant and the Executive Engineer, C.P.W.D.,.
The Sales Tax Officer B Circle, Jaipur City included in the taxable turnover of the respondent Rs.
Ajmer, regarding the providing and fix of the steel windows to the Accountant Generals Office, Jaipur, and looking to the terms of the transaction of the, type undertaken by the applicant the Board were justified in holding that the companytract was,, divisible between two parts representing the sale of the window, , and the labour charges in fixing the same and thus partly liable to sales tax ?
