Case Law Details
(a) The light energy which is used as a carrier in telecommunication service for rendering service is covered by the Parliamentary Legislation i.e. the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65 (109-a). It does not fall within the Entry 54 of List-II of VII Schedule.
(b) The contract in question is not a composite contract. It is an indivisible contract and a contract of service simplicitor. There is no element of sale at all to any extent. It is not a contract of sales simplicitor as contended by the State.
(c) It is declared that the light energy (Artificially Created Light Energy – ACLE) is one form of electromagnetic waves. It is not ‘goods’ as defined in Article 366 (12) of the Constitutions of India or under Section 2(m) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 or Section 2 (15) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003. Consequently, there is no sale of goods as held by the Assessing Authority. Therefore they have no power to levy tax.
(d) The judgement of BSNL and other Vs. Union of India and others reported in 2006 (3) SCC 1 squarely applies to the facts of these cases.
(e) The orders passed by the learned Single Judge are set aside.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
