news round up - Taxmann

242 Goods & Services Tax Cases - Reports [Vol. 1
over chassis, no change of form or condition took place, and in these
circumstances, no tax was liable to be imposed under section 3AAAA of the
U.P. Sales Tax Act. For this purpose, the Tribunal relied on a number of
case laws in its order.
4. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case,
I am of the view that chassis alone has no meaning to the customers who
cannot use the chassis alone without having the fabricated body over it.
After fabricating the body, the tempo is saleable item in the market. The
purchase of the chassis against Form 3A is not in dispute. In the case of Jain
Industries & Trading Corpn. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax 1989 ATJ 17
(All.), it was observed that the building or mounting do not change the
complexion, original form; and conditions of the goods.
5. In the circumstances, I agree with the observations made by the
Tribunal that mounting of the body over the chassis does not amount as
manufacturing activity but it felicitate the chassis for the purpose of
usable item and no different commercial item is emerged. When it is so
then I declined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal, which is hereby
sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein.
6. In the result, the revision filed by the department is dismissed.
[2010] 1 GST 242 (KER.)
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Sasi Road Finishers & Engineering Contractors*
v.
State of Kerala
C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR AND V.K. MOHANAN, JJ.
OT. REV. NO. 34 OF 2009
SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
PENALTY - For an attempt of evasion of tax - Lower authorities levied
penalty under section 47(6) upon assessee on ground that at time of
transport of goods, which were machinery for road work, from Kerala to
outside State, assessee did not have registration under Act - Whether
since transaction did not involve any sale, no penalty could be levied
*In favour of assessee.
GOODS & SERVICES TAX CASES ❑ JANUARY 20 - FEBRUARY 4, 2010 ◆ 118
■■
A
B
C
D
E
F
G