9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "1. Whether the petitioner was doing 'works contract' or sold plastic bags to his customers ? 2. Whether the penalty imposed under Section 12(3) of the Act, is warranted ?" 2. The petitioner is stated to be the manufacturer of plastic bags and after printing the name of the customers, they were sold to the customers. The assessee treated it as "works contract" and not as a "sale" and contended that there is no justification for making the assessment. 3. It is seen from the order of assessment that the assessee purchased HDPE bags from unregistered dealers through bought vouchers. The verification of the records show that the place of business of the assessee was inspected on 12.02.1998, which indicated that the assessee had not maintain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. On a consideration of the materials, the Tribunal held that the bags supplied by the assessee was a marketable commodity having commercial value and it was not works contract. Thus, it confirmed the order. Aggrieved by this, the assessee is on present revision. 6. Learned counsel for the assessee placing heavy reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Anandam Viswanathan reported in 73 STC 1 as well as unreported decision of this Court in Tax Case Revision No.1969 of 2006 dated 25.03.2010 (State of Tamil Nadu, Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirunelveli Vs. Alkenes Kraft), contended that given the nature of the contract given by its customers, printed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the transaction in question has to be viewed as a works contract. In the decision reported in the case of Tvl.Bharat Offset and others Vs. The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Rep. By its Registrar, Chennai and another reported in 34 VST 342 (Mds), this Court considered the decisions of the Supreme Court and our High Court on the question of sale of printed material and this Court held that where an assessee sells bags with the customer's name imprinted therein, the subject of the transaction being the sale of bag or diary as the case may be, the printing of the name is just incidental. The mere fact that the labels or logos have been printed would not make the transaction into a works contract. It is purely and simply a sale of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The fact that the Legislature has introduced the additional word in Entry-40 will not change the position of law in any manner. The authorities will have to examine each transaction and look at the contract in question and decide whether it is works contract or whether it is only a sale. The mere fact of bearing the logo or name upto the specification to the customer's will not make it a works contract." We hold that the decision of this Court apply to the facts of the case herein. Except for contending that the transaction is one of works contract, the assessee had not placed any material before any of the authorities. 11. Leaving that aside, as observed in the decision of this Court, when the primary object of the transaction is sale of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
