Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2014 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 225 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxTax Exemption - Whether Paddy husk falls under exemption - paddy husk versus rice husk – Interpretation – Held that:- Judgment in Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Vs. S.S. Ayodhya Distillery & others, [2008 (12) TMI 394 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] followed - As paddy and rice are considered to be the separate commodities, paddy husk cannot be treated to be rice husk - Paddy husk is not mentioned in both the notifications dated 7.9.1981 5.6.1985 - By notification dated 6.6.1996 'paddy husk' was inserted - Even then, the rice husk was not deleted - No explanation was offered therefor. Interpretation – Held that:- Two expressions having been used ordinarily two different meanings should be assigned thereto - If by reason of a notification taxes are sought to be imposed upon a new commodity applying Haydon's Rules it must be held that the mischief was sought to be remedied thereby - It is, thus, difficult to agree that rice husk and paddy husk denote the same commodity - If, according to the Government of UP, rice husk is this cover which further requires husking, no exception thereto can be taken - When a paddy is dehusked, it becomes paddy husk and when the rice is dehusked, it becomes rice husk - If something is included in the Schedule which is non-existent, no tax can be levied thereupon - Furthermore, if there is a doubt or dispute as to whether paddy husk or the rice husk denotes the same commodity or not, the benefit thereof shall be given to the assessee - Furthermore, it is not the case of the appellant that the respondent extracts any oil out of paddy husk - Decided against Revenue.
|