Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 43 (0.38 seconds)Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959
The State Of Madras vs Gannon Dunkerley & Co.,(Madras) Ltd on 1 April, 1958
One thing is significant to note
that in Larsen and Toubro (supra), it has been stated that after the
constitutional amendment, the narrow meaning given to the term
"works contract" in Gannon Dunkerley-I (supra) no longer survives
at present. It has been observed in the said case that even if in a
contract, besides the obligations of supply of goods and materials and
performance of labour and services, some additional obligations are
imposed, such contract does not cease to be works contract, for the
additional obligations in the contract would not alter the nature of the
contract so long as the contract provides for a contract for works and
satisfies the primary description of works contract. It has been further
held that once the characteristics or elements of works contract are
satisfied in a contract, then irrespective of additional obligations, such
contract would be covered by the term "works contract" because
nothing in Article 366(29A)(b) limits the term "works contract" to
contract for labour and service only."
Section 3 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956
Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 2 in Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [Entire Act]
M/S. Enviro Chemicals vs State Of Kerala on 10 February, 2011
56. The learned Single Judge whose order is under appeal before us has
applied the correct position of law by relying on Tvl.S.S.M.Processing Mills,
(referred supra), and on the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in Enviro
Chemicals Vs. State of Kerala.(referred supra).
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs Tvl.The Premier Litho Works on 31 July, 2009
1. The judgment in State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Premier Litho Works and
55/59
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD).No.649 of 2014
another, reported in (2009) 26 VST 205 (Madras), examined the question
whether a particular transaction is an inter-state sale or a works contract. In
the instant case, there is no quarrel that the appellants are involved in
works contract. The judgment is distinguishable on facts and on law and
reliance placed by the appellant on the said judgment is totally
misconceived. The 46th Amendment to the Constitution of India and the
insertion of Clause 29-A in Article 366 and Section 3-B(2)(e) of the Tamil
Nadu General Sales Tax , 1959, were not brought to the attention of the
Division Bench, since the issue involved was entirely different.
Commissioner Of Sales Tax vs Matushree Textile Limited on 22 August, 2003
“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
32/59
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD).No.649 of 2014
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.