IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21649 of 2011(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.CRESENT CONSTRUCTIONS,12/101A, MOOLEPPADAM CROSS ROAD,VAZHAKKALA SOUTH, KOCHI-682 030,REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI.E.A.SHAHUL HAMEED. BY ADV. SRI.DALE P.KURIEN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER-III (WC & LT), OFFICE OF TH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAXES, THEVARA,ERNAKULAM – 682 015. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, GOVERNMENT BUILDING,OPP.MUSEUM,MUSEUM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 3. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, STATUE JUNCTION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V.K. SHAMSUDHEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.21649/2011-E: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION IN FORM NO.4. ISSUED AS PER RULE 17 (14). EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE R.1. DTD. 29/07/2011. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. 05/08/2011 FROM THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 26/02/2008 IN W.P.(C).NO.38109/2007 (J). EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 06/08/2011 BY THE R.1. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 30/04/2008. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES OF REGISTRATION DTD. 05/05/2007 IN THE CASE OF KENT CONSTRUCTION. EXT.P.7(A): COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DTD. 27/06/2007 IN THE CASE OF T.J. MATHAI. EXT.P.7(B): COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DTD. 11/05/2010 IN THE CASE OF M/S. FRIENDS CONSTRUCTIONS. EXT.P.7(C): COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DTD. 25/06/2007 IN THE CASE OF M/S. P.X. FOUNDATION. EXT.P.7(D): COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DTD. 28/01/2008 IN THE CASE OF BSMI GRANITES, PERINGALA. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DTD 02/08/2011. EXT.P.8(A): COPY OF THE PERFORMA INVOICE DTD. 23/07/2011. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE ARTICLE FROM MALAYALA MANORAMA NEWS PAPER DTD. 08/08/2011 DISCUSSING THE INEVITABILITY OF MECHANISATION IN CONSTRUCTION. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 21649 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 10th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in executing civil contract works. The petitioner is an assessee on the rolls of the 1st respondent-assessing authority. For execution of certain contract works, the petitioner wants to purchase one JCB as evidenced by Exts.P8 and P8(a). Since it is an inter-state purchase, the petitioner wants to use C Forms for that purpose. The petitioner approached the 1st respondent for C Forms, which was rejected by the 1st respondent. That is why the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs; “1. call for the records of the case leading to Exhibit P5 order, declare the same to be illegal and non-est in the eye of law and quash the same, by way of issuing a Writ of certiorari; and 2. issue a writ of mandamus to the 1st respondent to endorse inter State purchase of JCB / Excavator as evidenced by Exhibit P8 series purchase order and proforma invoice, against C Forms in Ext.P1 registration Certificate of the Petitioner. 2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is entitled to purchase machinery on C Forms only if the machinery is to be used directly in the works contract. According to him, the JCB is not a material, which is to be used directly in the works contract. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. w.p.c.21649/11 2 4. Any person executing civil works would have to use machinery for that purpose. JCB is certainly a machinery which is ordinarily used in civil construction works. The question as to whether for purchasing the same, any sales tax concession is available itself is a moot question, which has to be considered at the time of considering the C Form at the time of assessment. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the contention of the learned Government Pleader that since the JCB is not a material, which is ordinarily used in civil construction works, C form cannot be issued. Therefore, I am satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to issue C Forms against Ext.P8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to issue C Forms against Exts.P8 and P8(a). This shall be done within two days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I hasten to add that I have not considered the eligibility of the petitioner for concession on the basis of the C Form to be submitted for this particular purchase and it is for the assessing authority to consider the C Form and pass appropriate orders during assessment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge