Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2011 (6) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2011 (6) TMI 716 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax


Issues:
Assessment of tax under Karnataka Sales Tax Act for two consecutive years based on the classification of goods under the Fourth Schedule.

Analysis:
For the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97, the petitioner declared gross turnovers and was subjected to tax by the assessing authority, which led to appeals before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and subsequently the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, in its order, classified the goods sold by the assessee under entry 2(a)(v) of the Fourth Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner contended that the goods should fall under entry 2(a)(vi) instead, citing the process of bending and corrugation applied to cold rolled strips. The senior counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Telangana Steel Industries v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1994] 93 STC 187 (SC) to support this argument.

The Court examined the definitions under entry 2(a)(v) and 2(a)(vi) of the Fourth Schedule, which respectively cover steel structurals and other iron and steel products. After considering the products and arguments presented, the Court agreed with the lower authorities' classification under entry 2(a)(v) for the petitioner's goods. The Court noted that the nature of raw materials and finished products, such as lathe channels and door frame sections, align more closely with the description under entry 2(a)(v) than 2(a)(vi).

The Court found no errors in the lower authorities' decision and upheld the Tribunal's order, dismissing the petitioner's appeals. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, emphasizing that the goods in question fell under entry 2(a)(v) as per the Fourth Schedule to the Act. The petitions were deemed meritless and were dismissed accordingly.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates