JUDGMENT
Antony Dominic, J.
1. The relief sought for in this writ petition is to direct the third respondent to issue Central sales tax registration certificate to the petitioner in form B prescribed under the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 (for short, “the Rules”) containing the list of goods covered in exhibit P2 A list by accepting exhibits P2 CST registration application submitted by the petitioner in form A prescribed under the Rules mentioned above. There is a further prayer to allow the petitioner to make inter-State purchase against C forms for execution of works contract.
2. The petitioner submits that it is engaged in works contracts and exhibits 2 P9 and P10 are the letters of award issued by their principals. The petitioner submitted exhibits PI and P1A applications for registration under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and Exhibits P2 and P2A, the CST registration application in form A along with the list of items to be purchased at concessional rate for execution of works contract were also submitted to the third respondent. The petitioner submits that based on exhibits PI and P2, the third respondent issued exhibit P3 registration certificate.
3. Subsequently, the petitioner purchased certain machineries required for 2 execution of their works contract from outside the State of Kerala and these machineries were brought from there. Exhibit P4 is the invoice of the machineries so purchased by them. The petitioner submits that the machineries were detained at the check-post by exhibit P5 detention notice pointing out the defect that it was not ascertainable whether the consignee (petitioner) was authorised to purchase the goods under transport for its own use. Thereupon the petitioner approached the third respondent and submitted exhibit P6 to issue the certificate for getting the batching plant and machinery released. According to the petitioner the third respondent demanded the petitioner to give a self bond which, inter alia, declared that they will not issue any C form for the purchase and that the CST registration did not include the item purchased. Since the machineries were detained at the check-post and as the petitioner had no other option, the petitioner executed exhibit P7 bond and thereupon the third respondent issued exhibit P8 certificate of ownership in Form 16 and on that basis the consignment was released. The petitioner submits that it being a works contractor, is entitled to be issued certificate of registration in form B prescribed under the Rules and also is entitled to make inter-State purchases against C forms.
4. In the statement filed on behalf of the respondents they are resisting the prayer of the petitioner. According to them, petitioner is only a works contractor and is not eligible for getting C form declarations against purchase of machinery and equipments which are used in labour and services. It is contended that being a contractor for construction of buildings the petitioner cannot be said to be a manufacturer and for purchasing machinery used in labour, the contractor cannot avail of concessional rate provided under the CST Act. According to them, the petitioner can only avail of Rule 58(18) of the KVAT Rules and according to them, the petitioner can purchase goods for own use by issuing form 16 countersigned by the jurisdictional assessing authority as provided under Rule 58(18) of the KVAT Rules and Circular Nos. 51 of 2006 and 14 of 2007.
5. In sum and substance the contention raised by the respondents is that since the petitioner is not a manufacturer, it cannot effect purchase against C forms and that the petitioner can only get Form 16 countersigned by the jurisdictional assessing authority. The respondents seem to be relying on the decision in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law) v. N. Kannan Nair in support of this proposition. However, the subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court shows that the view now taken by the respondents is incorrect. In the case of Assistant Commissioner (Intelligence) v. Nandanam Construction Co. [1999] 115 STC 427 a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court while examining this very question in the context of Section 6A(ii)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, upheld the liability of the contractors to pay purchase tax on goods purchased from persons other than registered dealers and either consumed for the purpose of manufacture of goods for sale or consumed otherwise. The Supreme Court held that the contractors who were engaged in building of flats and houses, for which purpose they bought materials from persons other than registered dealers, were liable to purchase tax under the Act since the goods purchased were used in the manufacture of other goods for sale or otherwise. Therefore, this judgment of the apex court is an authority for the proposition that the activity of a works contractor engaged in building contracts amounts to manufacture. In Ajantha Colour Lab v. Additional Sales Tax Officer-III, II Circle, Kozhikode [2000] 118 STC 1, a Division Bench of this Court held that a dealer engaged in works contract was entitled to registration under the CST Act. The Division Bench followed the earlier judgments which took the view that a person executing works contract is a dealer and entitled to receive C forms from the prescribed authority. In fact, in the judgment of a learned single judge in Colourgraphs v. Sales Tax Officer III Circle, Ernakulam it was held that once a dealer is registered under the CST Act, he cannot be denied C forms.
6. From the judgments referred to above, it is therefore clear that a person 6 engaged in works contract of building construction is a manufacturer and is liable to be granted registration as a dealer under the CST Act and entitled to issue C forms for effecting inter-State purchases. If that be so, the stand taken by the respondent in their statement justifying the denial of the benefit to the petitioner cannot be upheld.
7. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of directing that the petitioner will be issued CST registration certificate in form B prescribed under the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 containing the list of goods covered in exhibits P2A list accepting exhibit P2 CST registration application.
8. The petitioner will also be allowed to make inter-State purchases against C forms for execution of works contract undertaken by, them. This, however, shall be subject to the petitioner complying with the statutory formalities, if any, in this regard.