Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) This revision is admitted on the following questions:- "(i) Whether, the order of the Tribunal as well as the authorities below are erroneous in holding that the construction work of building done by the revisionist over its own land, falls under the definition of works contract on behalf of the prospective purchaser of the property? (ii) Whether, tax can be imposed under Section 3 F of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, on the goods purchased from outside the State of U.P., specifically for the purpose of being used in the construction of building for which risk and reward passed on the purchaser on execution of sale deed? (iii) Whether, the addition of 20% profits made in the purchase value of goods purchased for being used in the construction activity is based on surmises and conjectures and, therefore, not sustainable in the eyes of law? "
(2.) On the first question, learned counsel submits that there was no works contract since the assessee was the owner of land in question and had raised constructions. It is also stated that although allotment was made but no transfer deed was executed as yet, and, therefore, raising of construction cannot be treated to be a works contract.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that it is admitted to the revisionist that not only allotment of flat was made, but the funds received as allotment money was utilised for raising construction.;