IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Arvind Saran Das and Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri U.K. Pandey, learned standing counsel for the State. As the controversy involved in these revisions is identical, the same is being decided by the common judgment and order treating the S.T.R. No. 4 of 2008 as the leading case.

(2.) THIS is an assessee's revision for the assessment year 2003 -04. The revisionist imported building and construction material under the terms of contract dated February 8, 2001 entered into between two parties, i.e., the applicant and the National Highway Authority of India. The Tribunal has not believed the contention of the assessee that the cement which was brought in within the State for the purpose of use in the works contract. The questions of law Nos. 2, 3 and 5 have been referred, which are hereunder:

(3.) THE Tribunal has simply recorded a finding that the cement was brought into the State of U.P. Other than that no finding has been recorded by the Tribunal that the cement was not used in the works contract or that it was misused by the applicant.