YASHWANT VARMA, J. - (1.) This batch of revisions, which raise identical issues have with the consent of parties been taken up for disposal together.
(2.) The issue itself relates to the validity of the action taken against the revisionist on an alleged breach of the provisions of Section 8D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 1948 Act. Briefly stated, the revisionist has been held liable to pay a penalty in terms of Section 8D(6) of the 1948 Act as consequence of its failure to deduct tax in respect of a works contract awarded by it. For the purposes of laying cables, the revisionist is stated to have awarded contracts to various parties. One such contract and the terms upon which the same was to be executed stands enshrined in an agreement dated 24 January 2002. The relevant terms of the said contract are as under: "Whereas it has been decided to award the work of laying underground cable falling in the jurisdiction of Telecom District Bareilly to M/s A.A. Cables Layers Ltd., 25A, Model Town Bareilly. M/s A.A. Cable Layers Ltd., 25A, Model Town Bareilly.....
(3.) The contractor will coordinate between the BSNL and agencies like PWD/ Municipality/BDA/UPSEB etc. for road cutting. Until road cutting permission is obtained, contractor will not get cable issued for laying.;