Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

17. Mr. Joshi referred to the decision of the apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Sarvodaya Printing Press Fine Art Printer reported in [1999] 114 STC 242. In that case, the respondent who ran a printing press, entered into an agreement with the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board for the supply of "revenue money receipt book" at the rate of Rs. 8.88 per receipt book. It was held in that case that the paper and ink used in the process were the property of the respondent before printing but after printing, they became the property of the Board. It was held that the property in those goods, i.e., the paper and ink which was passed on to the Board, was only incidental or ancillary to the contract of printing and, therefore, it was not a case of sale but a works contract and hence sales tax was not leviable under the Bombay Sales Tax Act.

38. The ratio laid down by this Court in the case of R.M.D.C. Press Pvt. Ltd. [1999] 112 STC 307 has no precedential value in view of the decisions of the apex Court in the case of Sarvodaya Printing Press [1999] 114 STC 242 and the Constitution Bench (three-Judge Bench) decision in the case of Associated Cement Companies Ltd. [2001] 124 STC 59. In the case of R.M.D.C. Press [1999] 112 STC 307, this Court took the view that the ink is a tool of the printer and the same is consumed in the process of printing and looses its identity as goods and, therefore, no property can be said to pass in ink used in the execution of the contract of printing. This finding is contrary to the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Sarvodaya Printing Press v. State of Maharashtra reported in [1994] 93 STC 387, wherein it is held that the paper and ink used in printing passes to the customer after printing and become the property of the customer by theory of accretion. The Full Bench decision of this Court has been upheld by the apex Court which is reported in State of Maharashtra v. Sarvodaya Printing Press Fine Art Printer [1999] 114 STC 242. Therefore, the decision in R.M.D.C. Press case [1999] 112 STC 307 rendered by the division Bench without considering the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Sarvodaya Printing Press [19941 93 STC 387, (which was binding on the Division Bench), must be held to be per incuriam. Once it is held that the property in goods used in the execution of the works contract passes incidentally or by theory of accretion, such passing, though not a sale under BST Act, would be deemed sale under the Works Contracts Act. In the present case, as the property of the materials used in the process of dyeing and printing are passed on to the customer in the form of coloured shade and such passing amounts to sale, the provisions of the Works Contracts Act are attracted.