Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2014 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (9) TMI 454 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRate of tax - Classification of Aluminum foil - Liability of tax @ 4% or concessional rate of 1% - Whether aluminium foil falling in word "sheets", therefore, covered under the notification dated December 31, 1975 and, further, whether the notification dated June 13, 1985 issued by the Revenue is applicable for the purpose of granting exemption for five years commencing from June 13, 1985, the day on which the notification was issued by the Revenue - Held that:- there is no quarrel with regard to adjudication made by the honourable Supreme Court that mere change in the shape by mechanical pressing does not change the commodity and the commodity continues to hold the essential characteristics. Here, in the instant case, specifically a separate notification was issued for aluminium foil because it is used for packing purposes, therefore, if any aluminium sheet after processing created a new purpose for use then the Legislature can prescribe separate tariff for the use of that commodity. Here, in this case, both the aforesaid notifications are separate and distinct. Notification dated December 31, 1975 was issued for the purpose of one per cent tax upon non-ferrous rods, pipes, strips, section, sheets, circles and tubings but aluminium foil was not included in the above commodities and another notification was issued on June 13, 1985 which was not in continuance of aforesaid notification dated December 31, 1975 but it was separate notification granting time-bound exemption in tax upon aluminium foil. Therefore, all the judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioners do not support the plea taken by the petitioner-assessee for the purpose of taking advantage of notification dated December 31, 1975. With regard to non-applicability of the notification dated June 13, 1985 for the reason that it has not been issued in supersession of the earlier notification dated December 31, 1975, yet another baseless ground has been taken by the petitioner-assessee because the general tax is at the rate of four per cent and exemption is granted for some of the goods as per their use vide notification dated December 31, 1975 purposely; and, later on, for five years the said exemption was granted for aluminium foil vide notification dated June 13, 1985; meaning thereby, the intention of the Legislature is expressive that except for the commodities falling under the entry of notification dated December 31, 1975, general tax will be levied and purposely with regard to aluminium foil exemption for five years was granted while issuing notification dated June 13, 1985, therefore, on this ground also no case is made out for interference. More so, the Tax Board has considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case in right perspective. There is no error in the adjudication made by the Tax Board in holding that "aluminium foil" is different commodity than the aluminium sheet. In my opinion, the claim of the petitioner-assessee to treat aluminium foil as non-ferrous sheets covered under notification dated December 31, 1975 is not sustainable in law in view of the fact that vide a separate notification dated June 13, 1985 time-bound exemption for five years to levy one per cent tax instead of four per cent tax was granted, which is not under challenge, itself is sufficient to hold that aluminium foil is different commodity and use of that commodity is also altogether different than the commodities covered under notification dated December 31, 1975. Therefore, claim of the petitioners for treating aluminium foil as aluminium non-ferrous sheets is hereby rejected. - Decided against assessee.
|