TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 848X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the position to hold that masala is not included in entry 89 which attracts the tax at 12.5 per cent considering entries 61 and 89 as stood prior to Karnataka Act No. 4 of 2006, we are of the view that the word masala powder is not included therein and therefore, it is clear that masala powder come under the residuary clause traceable to section 4 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Thus answer the substantial question of law in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. - 28 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 17-11-2009 - MANJUNATH K.L. AND ARAVIND KUMAR , JJ. The judgment of the court was delivered by K.L. MANJUNATH J. Challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Advance Ruling Committee's order da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Entry 89 of the Third Schedule appended to the Act will include cut chillies, spent chillies and chilly seeds, but excluding spices in the form of masala powder, instant mixes or other mixtures containing more than one spice or a spice with any other material. Therefore there is no dispute with regard to payment of VAT with effect from April 1, 2006 in respect of the product manufactured by the assessee like garam masala, curry powder, sambar powder and rasam powder, at 12.5 per cent. But the dispute is in regard to the earlier period, i.e., from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006. Since entry 89 did not include the form of masala powder, instant mixes, etc., the Advance Ruling Committee after considering the arguments advanced by the rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that entry 89 as on April 1, 2005 includes the masala powder and other mixes and requests the court to answer the substantial question of framed in favour of the appellant. Per contra, learned counsel for the Revenue relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in A.P. Products v. State of A.P. [2007] 8 VST 373; [2007] 6 SCC 365 contends that the point involved in this case is no more res integra as the masala powder is altogether a different product other than the spice as ruled by the Supreme Court. She further contends that the judgment in Alladi Venkateswarlu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh [1978] 41 STC 394 (SC) relied upon by the appellant has also been considered by the Supreme Court in A.P. Products [2007] 8 VST 373 (SC); ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
