9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1062X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gur, molasses, etc., in the State of Assam. The said items are brought from different States where they are manufactured and sold in the State of Assam. According to the petitioner, the authorities imposed the tax under the Act in spite of objections raised by the petitioner that "raab gur" is a form of "gur" which is not fit for human consumption and solely used as cattle feed which is exempted from tax under the Act. According to the petitioner, "raab gur" is nothing but another form of "gur". It is stated that after the juice is extracted from sugarcane, the juice is thickened by dehydration and takes the form of "raab" which is a semi-liquid form of sugarcane juice. After boiling the "raab" in a crystallizer, the same is allowed to get cooled and crystals are formed which are then rotated in the crystallizer. The said crystals "raab", are put into a centrifugal machine and during the process of infusion of sulphur, the semi solid sugarcane is cleaned and whitened. The "raab" which is not put into centrifugal machine but dehydrated and hardened by open pan process becomes "gur" which is used for human consumption. On the other hand, the "raab" which is not allowed to be hardened ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 1794 of 2004. The petitioner, therefore, contends that even if "raab gur" is not treated as "gur" for the purpose of entry 17, it, being a "cattle feed" will be covered by entry 50 for exemption from tax under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993. As the petitioner did not pay tax on the aforesaid item "raab gur" treating to be an exempted item, the assessing authority imposed the tax. In W.P. (C) No. 1794 of 2004, respondent No. 4 vide order dated November 29, 2002 imposed tax at eight per cent on the petitioner treating "gur" to be taxable against which the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Joint Commissioner of Taxes, Assam. The Joint Commissioner of Taxes vide his order dated January 28, 2004 dismissed the revision petition with the finding that "raab gur" is neither a "cattle feed" nor a "gur" and held that "raab gur" is not included in Schedule I or any Schedule and is to be treated as unclassified goods under entry 2 of Schedule III and taxable at eight per cent. The relevant portion of the said order dated January 28, 2004 is reproduced hereinbelow: "I have heard both the parties to the issue and perused the records. The petitioner classified ' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r entry 50, it is the stand of the Revenue that "raab gur" is used not only as a cattle feed but has other uses. The Revenue also contended that the ultimate use of an item cannot be criteria for the purpose of classification. Therefore, the issue to be decided by this court is whether "raab gur" is to be treated as "gur" so as to be covered under entry 17 of Schedule I of the Act for exemption from payment of tax. Similarly, if "raab gur" is treated as a "cattle feed" it will also enjoy exemption, as "cattle feed" is exempted under entry 50 of Schedule I of the Act. The first contention of the petitioner is that "raab gur" is another form "gur" and hence should be treated as "gur" for the purpose of exemption under entry 17 of Schedule I of the Act. The petitioner has also relied upon the definition of "gur" as given in Gur Control Order, 1994, the Gur Movement Control Order, 1963 as well as the Gur (Regulation of Use) Order, 1968, to show that "gur" also means "raab gur". It is now well-settled that definition of a word in another statute cannot be imported unless the Acts are pari materia and the word or expression used in any statute is to be used in the context of the parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l now examine the other contention of the petitioner that "raab gur" being an item of cattle feed can be exempted from tax under entry 50 of Schedule I of the Act. It is the specific stand of the petitioner that "raab gur" is not fit for human consumption and used as a cattle feed. It is not disputed by the authorities that "raab gur" is used as a cattle feed. The only case of the Revenue is that apart from its use as a cattle feed, there are other many known use and the ultimate use of an item cannot be criteria for the purpose of classification. We are unable to agree with this stand of the Revenue inasmuch as it is not shown as to the primary known uses of "raab gur" other than as a cattle feed. Even if "raab gur" is used for other purposes as contended by the Revenue, the fact that "raab gur" is used as a cattle feed is not denied by the Revenue authorities. Since, cattle feed is exempted under entry 50 of Schedule I of the Act, "raab gur" which is also used as a cattle feed would be exempted under the said entry 50. Cattle feed could be of any substance known by different names or may consist of different products and there is no reason as to why any substance, if known and us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
