JUDGMENT : Sri S.K. Mishra, J. 1. In this Commercial Tax Revision, the revisionist prays to set-aside the orders passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, whereby it has held that taxable turnover of the revisionist - assessee (hereinafter referred to as “the Assessee” for brevity) is Rs. 1,11,930/- on the ground that it is in violation and ignoring the provisions of Sub-Section 3, 7 and 9 of Section 3 of the Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for brevity). The Assessee is a civil contractor. For a period between 01.10.2005 and 31.03.2006, he received a sum of Rs. 6,21,570/- from the contractee department out of which Rs. 4,61,670/- was against the earth work carried out by the Assessee-revisionist. The case of the revisionist is that since the amount received by him for execution of work contract, which involved sale goods only for Rs. 1,59,900/-, he is entitled to deduction of 30% as labour charges as per the provisions under Rule 14(2)(e) of the Act. He submitted his return before the Assessing Authority for the period of 01.10.2005 to 31.03.2006 and the Assessing Authority passed the assessment order under Section 25(6) of the Act and rejected several contentions of the Assessee-revisionist and determined the returnable taxable turnover at Rs. 3,33,630/- and imposed tax thereupon. 2. The Assessee - revisionist filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, who vide order dated 07.07.2010 accepted the contentions of the Assessee – revisionist that Assessee – revisionist received a sum of Rs. 4,61,670/- for the hill side cutting and earth work, and therefore, deleted the said addition made by the Assessing Authority towards the payment received by the Assessee – revisionist for hill side cutting and earth work. The First Appellate Authority further gave a deduction @ 30% as provided under Rule 14(2)(e) of the Act, and determined the taxable turnover of the Assessee – revisionist as Rs. 1,11,930/-. 3. The Assessee – revisionist aggrieved, as his contention was not accepted by the First Appellate Authority that the taxable turnover determined by the First Appellate Authority is below the taxable quantum, therefore, there is no liability to pay the tax by the Assessee – revisionist. 4. 1,11,930/-. 3. The Assessee – revisionist aggrieved, as his contention was not accepted by the First Appellate Authority that the taxable turnover determined by the First Appellate Authority is below the taxable quantum, therefore, there is no liability to pay the tax by the Assessee – revisionist. 4. Since, the matter involved question of law, he preferred a Second Appeal before the Commercial Tax Tribunal on the sole ground that the First Appellate Authority calculated the taxable quantum of revisionist at Rs. 1,11,930/- which is below the taxable limit as provided under Section 3(7) of the Act, but the Second Appeal was dismissed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal vide Annexure 4 to the writ petition. 5. At this stage, there is no dispute that the petitioner was awarded a work contract of Rs. 6,21,570/- out of which a sum of Rs. 4,61,670/- was for hill side cutting and earth work and as Assessee - revisionist did not involve in the sale of goods or services, it was not considered. The question that remains to be decided in this case is whether the Assessee-revisionist’s income of Rs. 1,11,930/- is liable to be taxed, in view of 30% remission for labour charges. 6. Mr. S. K. Posti, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Assessee - revisionist relying upon the judgment of Jharkhand High Court in the case of “Triveni Engicons Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Jharkhand 2014 SCC Online Jhar 1050 : (2014) 4 AIR Jhar R 1” would argue that Assessee - revisionist is liable for tax of transfer of property in goods under Sub-Clause (b) of Clause 29(A) is deemed to be a sale of goods involved in the execution of works contract by the person making transfer and a purchase of those goods by the person to whom such transfer is made. The object of the new definition introduced in Clause 29-A of Article 366 of the Constitution, is therefore, to enlarge the scope of “tax on sale or purchase of goods”, wherever it occurs in the Constitution, so that it may include within its scope the transfer, delivery or supply of goods that may take place under any of the transactions referred to in sub-Clauses (a) to (f) thereof, wherever such transfer, delivery or supply becomes subject to levy of sales tax. 7. 7. The Court further ruled that the expression “tax on sale or purchase of goods” in Entry No. 54 of the State list, therefore, includes a tax on transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of work contract also. In the aforesaid case, the Division Bench of Jharkhand High Court has held as follows:- “20. It is a well settled principle of interpretation of statute that a provision must be construed in such a manner so as to make it workable. In Tinsukhia Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. State of Assam [ (1989) 3 SCC 709 ] the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed, “the Courts strongly lean against any construction, which tends to reduce a statute to a futility”. The provision of a statute must be so construed as to make it effective and operative, on the principle “ut res magis valeat quam pereat. 8. Thus, it is clear that the amount of Rs. 4,61,670/- is not liable to be included in the turnover of the Assessee while calculating the taxable quantum. This conclusion arrived at by the Authorities is no not in dispute at this stage. Sub-Section 3, 7 and 9 of Section 3 of the Act provides as follows:- 3. Incidence of tax. Thus, it is clear that the amount of Rs. 4,61,670/- is not liable to be included in the turnover of the Assessee while calculating the taxable quantum. This conclusion arrived at by the Authorities is no not in dispute at this stage. Sub-Section 3, 7 and 9 of Section 3 of the Act provides as follows:- 3. Incidence of tax. (3) Subject to provisions of sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) as may be applicable, every dealer or a person shall pay from the date he becomes so liable, a tax for each assessment year on his turnover, to be determined in the prescribed manner, of all sales inside the State, made on or after the date he becomes liable to pay tax at such rates as provided by or under section 4 of the Act; (7) Taxable Quantum- (a) No dealer shall, except as otherwise provided under clause (e) of this subsection, be liable to tax under sub- section (3), if, during the assessment year, the aggregate of his turnover of sales of all goods, whether such sale is made by the dealer directly or through his branch, depot or agent inside the State, or in the course of inter-state trade or commerce, or in the course of export out of the territory of India or by way of consignment outside the State, is less than the amount mentioned hereinafter- (i) in the case of manufacturers or producers of any goods for sale Rs 5 lacs (ii) in case of execution of works contract Rs 5 lacs (iii) in case of transfer of right to use goods Rs 5 lacs (iv) in case of dealers engaged in any other business Rs 5 lacs 6 Provided that the State Government may, by notification in the Gazette, fix a larger amount either in respect of all dealers in any goods or in respect of particular class of dealers; (b) Nothing in clause (a) shall apply in respect of – (i) the sale by a dealer of goods imported by him from outside Uttaranchal, the turnover whereof is liable to tax under this Act, (ii)the sale by a dealer of- (a)goods imported by him form outside Uttaranchal after furnishing to selling dealer a declaration under subsection (4) of section (8) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956; (b)goods purchased or imported by furnishing any `declaration or certificate prescribed under any provision of this Act; (c)goods manufactured by him by using the goods referred to in sub-clause (i) or sub-clause (ii); (c) Where the amount specified in, or notified under clause (a) is altered during an assessment year, the tax payable by a dealer under this section shall be computed as follows:- (i) on the turnover relating to the period prior to such alteration, as though the amount specified in or notified under clause (a) had not been altered; and (ii) on the remainder, as though the altered amount has been in force on all material dates; 7 (d) Where tax is payable, and has been so paid, by a commission agent on any turnover on behalf of his principal, the principal shall not be liable to pay the tax in respect of the same turnover; (e) (i) Every dealer commencing business during the course of an assessment year shall be liable to pay tax in that year with effect from the date immediately following the day on which the aggregate of his turnover from the date of commencement of his business for the first time exceeds the proportionate amount of taxable quantum; (ii) Every dealer discontinuing business during the course of an assessment year, shall be liable to pay tax up to that date if the aggregate of his turnover for the period from the first day of the commencement of the assessment year to the date of discontinuance of his business exceeds the amount of taxable quantum proportionately. Explanation: The dissolution of a firm or association of persons or partition of a Joint Hindu Family or transfer by a dealer of his business shall be deemed to be discontinuance of business within the meaning of this subsection. (9) Taxable Turnover - (a) The tax payable by a dealer liable to pay tax under sub-section (3) of section 3 shall be levied on his taxable turnover of sales; (b) Taxable turnover of sales in relation to a dealer liable to pay tax on sale of goods under subsection (3) of section 3 shall be that part of the gross turnover of sales during any period which remains after deducting therefrom, (a) sales of goods declared as exempt from tax in Schedule 1 (b) sales of goods which are shown to the satisfaction of the assessing authority to have taken place- (i)in the course of interstate trade or commerce, or (ii) outside the State of Uttaranchal other than by way of sale, or (iii)in the course of export of the goods out of the territory of India Explanation: section 3, section 4 and section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 shall apply for determining whether or not a particular sale or purchase has taken place in the manner indicated in sub-clause (i),sub-clause(ii)or sub-clause (iii). (c) in case of turnover of sales in relation to works contract certain deductions as may be prescribed and subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be imposed; 9 (d) such other sales as may be prescribed and subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be imposed; 9. A plain reading of sub-section 7, especially Clause (ii) therein of Section 3 which deals with the case involving execution of work contract, taxes shall be levied when the taxable quantum Rs. 5,00,000/- onwards. It is admitted in this case that the contractor was paid of Rs. 1,11,930/- towards the work executed of Rs. 4,61,670/- being not liable to be included in the turnover of the Assessee – revisionist while calculating the taxable quantum. The Assessee – revisionist is not liable to pay any tax on the same, especially in view of the fact that neither the Assessing Authority nor the First Appellate Court nor the Second Appellate Court has held that Assessee – revisionist has income from other sources for the assessment year, therefore, the imposition of tax of Rs. The Assessee – revisionist is not liable to pay any tax on the same, especially in view of the fact that neither the Assessing Authority nor the First Appellate Court nor the Second Appellate Court has held that Assessee – revisionist has income from other sources for the assessment year, therefore, the imposition of tax of Rs. 1,11,930/- is illegal, hence, to be set-aside. 10. In that view of the matter, the revision is allowed. The impugned judgments are set-aside, hence, the Assessee – revisionist is not liable to pay any sales/commercial tax for the period in consideration.