mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SALES TAX APPLICATION 20 OF 2007 IN REFERENCE APPLICATION NO.45 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Sales Tax....Applicant Vs. M/s.KND Engineering Technologies Ltd. (Formerly known as K.N. Dadeina Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondents Mr.S.K. Nair, A Panel Counsel for Applicant. None for Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 21, 2009 P.C. Heard learned Counsel for the Revenue. None present for the Respondents. After hearing the Revenue the learned Tribunal is directed to make a reference on the following questions to this Court within eight weeks from today. “i) Whether on the true & correct interpretation of Rule 8(5) of the Works Contract (Re-enacted) Rules, 1989 and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Rule 8(5) of the Works Contract Rules has overriding effect over the provisions contained in Section 9(1) of the Works Contract (Re- enacted) Act, 1989 read with Section 38(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959? ii) Whether on the true & correct interpretation of Section 36(3)(a) read with Section 9(2) of the Works Contract (Re-enacted) Act, 1989 the Tribunal was justified in holding that opportunity of hearing should be given to the dealer before levy of interest u/s.9(2) of the Works Contract Act r/w Section 36(3)(a) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959?” Application disposed of accordingly. (D.G. KARNIK,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)