GEOGY GEORGE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O .T.Rev.Nos. 57/2013, 134/2013, 135/2013 and 136/2013 are filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Kerala Value Added Tax Additional Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal1), Palakkad dated 20.03.2013 and 26.06.2013 respectively. O.T.Rev.Nos.130/2013, 22/2014, 23/2014 and 24/2014 are filed by the State aggrieved by the common order dated 30.04.2013 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Additional Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam. In all the above revisions, the common controversy which needs clarification at the hands of this Court is what exactly would include under Section 8(a)(i) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (for short, 'the Act1) so far as the expression "whole contract amount'. 

(2.) IN so far as revision petitions filed by the State, turnover pertaining to assessment years 2006 -07, 2007 -j8, 20r)8 -JJ and 2009 -10 are involved. Respondent/asseo

(3.) THE stand of the assessee is that he undertook two types of contracts. First type was construction activity by employing labour as well as by procuring and supplying necessary materials for construction work. Second type of contract exclusively relates to labour contract and there is no procurement and supply of necessary materials for construction.