1994 (6) TMI 195 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Classification of "Rita" under item 36 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.

Analysis:
The case involved the classification of "Rita," a liquid concentrate, under item 36 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner-assessee contested the assessment, arguing that "Rita" should not be classified under item 36, as it needed to be mixed with oils before application to the hair. The original authority and subsequent appellate bodies upheld the classification under item 36, leading to the filing of a revision petition.

The petitioner's counsel contended that "Rita" should not be considered a hair tonic, hair oil, or hair lotion as it required mixing with other oils before application. Reference was made to judgments from Kerala, Bombay, and Madras High Courts to support this argument. The Government Pleader, on the other hand, argued that "Rita" is indeed a hair tonic and falls under item 36 of the First Schedule.

The Court examined the description of goods under item 36, which includes cosmetics and toilet preparations, hair tonics, hair oils, and hair lotions. Based on the literature provided by the petitioner, it was found that "Rita" satisfied the requirements of both a hair tonic and cosmetics. The Court also reviewed judgments from other High Courts cited by the petitioner's counsel but found them not applicable to the case at hand.

Ultimately, the Court concluded that "Rita" fell within the meaning of item 36 of the First Schedule to the Act. It was determined that "Rita" possessed the qualities of hair tonics and cosmetics, justifying its classification under item 36. As a result, the Court found no legal infirmity in the order of the Tribunal and dismissed the revision petition.

In summary, the Court upheld the classification of "Rita" under item 36 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, as it met the criteria for hair tonics and cosmetics outlined in the relevant schedule. The petitioner's arguments and cited judgments from other High Courts were deemed inapplicable to the case, leading to the dismissal of the revision petition.