MAHESH CHANDRA KAPOOR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is a contractor carrying on business at Bahraich. It appears that in the financial year 1967-68, the Lateral Road Project, Temporary Road Construction Division, P.W.D., Bahraich, had taken on lease the Katiara Cauri Stone Quarry from the forest department and it wanted the stone extracted from the quarry to be transported. It invited tenders for that work. The petitioner submitted a tender which was accepted by a letter dated 26th February, 1966, issued from the office of the Executive Engineer, P.W.D., Bahraich. The petitioner in pursuance of that contract carried out the work and received payment from the P.W. Department in accordance with the rate agreed upon. The Sales Tax Officer assessed the petitioner under section 7(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act on the payment of Rs. 80,000 to a tax of Rs. 1,600. The petitioner did pay this tax. Subsequently, information was received by the Sales Tax Officer that the total payment received by the petitioner from the P.W. Department in connection with the contract was Rs. 6,23,687. He accordingly reopened the assessment under section 21. The petitioner filed objection against the proceedings under section 21 saying that he was engaged in a works contract involving no sale of any goods and, as such, was not liable to any tax. This objection was not accepted and the petitioner was assessed by an assessment order dated 29th March, 1972, at a further turnover of Rs. 6,20,000 to a tax of Rs. 12,400. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged this assessment order.

(2.) THE contention is that the petitioner was engaged in a works contract, which did not involve any sale of goods and, as such, the provisions of the U.P. Sales Tax Act did not apply and the impugned assessment order is without jurisdiction. He has annexed to the writ petition certain documents, including the agreement executed between him and the P.W. Department, which show very clearly that the petitioner was given the contract to collect 1 1/2" gauge ballast stone from Katiara Cauri Quarry and to stack the same at Bichia Railway Station. He was to be paid at the rate of 70 per cent. cft. of the ballast stone. The Sales Tax Officer has treated this contract as a contract of supply and has levied sales tax. After going through the material on the record we are satisfied that the petitioner was engaged in a works contract and there was no sale of any material. As such, he was not liable to any tax on the payment received by him for the execution of the contract.

(3.) TURNING now to the annexures, admitted by the Sales Tax Officer to have been filed before him, annexure 1 is a letter of acceptance issued by the Executive Engineer, Lateral Road Project, Temporary Road Construction Division, Bahraich, dated 26th February, 1966. The subject of this letter is : "Tender for collection of 1 1/2" stone ballast at Bichia."