TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 959
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax at 12.5 per cent on aluminium powder. As per the petitioner, he is not liable to pay tax on aluminium powder at 12.5 per cent. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has not availed of the alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner under section 46 of the VAT Act and also under the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner submitted tax returns for the financial years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, calculating the rate of tax at four per cent. The authority assessed the tax of the petitioner at 12.5 per cent. Entry No. 36 of Schedule II, Part II of the VAT Act prescribes rate of tax on aluminium at four per cent. The aforesaid entry is as under: ENTRY NO. 36 Ferrous and non-ferrous metals and alloys, non-ferrous me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction that is sought to be made on behalf of the appellant that shredded coconut would not be considered as appropriate an offering on an auspicious occasion as the coconut is, is not an acceptable reason for holding that desiccated coconut is not coconut. Emphasis is on the fact that the Encyclopaedia Britannica states that it is the fresh meat of the coconut which is shredded and dried which results in the desiccated coconut appears to us to be misplaced for copra is also the result of drying the fresh meat of sections of the coconut. ... 10. The learned Solicitor-General appearing for the respondentState of Orissa sought to reply upon a decision of this court in Rajasthan Roller Flour Mills Association v. State of Rajasthan [1993] 91 S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: "In view of the expressed language, a very wide meaning has been ascribed to this entry. Thus, in the considered opinion of this court, coal ash would be covered under entry 1 of Part IV of Schedule II and not under entry 1 of Part VI of Schedule II of the Act, which is residuary entry. It is well-settled that when a commodity is covered under a specific entry then for the purposes of determining the rate of tax, Revenue is not permitted to resort to the residuary entry. One has to draw distinction between exigibility of tax on a goods, i.e., taxability of a goods and the rate of tax payable on the sale of such goods. The Full Bench was not concerned with the rate of tax but with the question of taxability of unserviceable stores items i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. [1972] 29 STC 413 (MP) and Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. v. Samrathmal Dhoolchand reported in [1972] 29 STC 418 (MP) (App). It may also be pointed out that for the assessment year 1989-90, the assessing officer had assessed the sales tax at the rate of 12 per cent following the Full Bench view. That order was set aside by the Deputy Commissioner, Ujjain Division, holding that the Full Bench in Hukumchand Mills' case [1988] 71 STC 101 (MP) [FB]; [1987] MPLJ 570, is not for a proposition that the rate of tax payable on the sale of coal ash was at the rate of 12 per cent instead of four per cent. Despite the aforesaid order, the assessing officer for the period from April 1, 1990 to Mar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arned Deputy Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the respondents/ State relied on the following judgments: (i) Collector of Central Excise v. Rajasthan State Chemical Works [1991] 4 SCC 473. (ii) Monga Rice Mill v. State of Haryana [2004] 135 STC 549 (SC); [2004] 6 SCC 101. (iii) Ashirwad Ispat Udyog v. State Level Committee [1999] 112 STC 207 (SC); [1998] 8 SCC 85. (iv) Commissioner of Central Excise v. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. [2007] 9 RC 129; [2007] 5 SCC 260. In our opinion, the cases relied on by the learned Deputy AdvocateGeneral are distinguishable because in the present case, the question is that whether the petitioner is liable to pay tax at four per cent which is provided for aluminium in entry No. 36 of Schedule II, Part I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the statutory remedies have not been exhausted. There are at least two well-recognised exceptions to the doctrine with regard to the exhaustion of statutory remedies. In the first place, it is well-settled that where proceedings are taken before a Tribunal under a provision of law, which is ultra vires it is open to a party aggrieved thereby to move the High Court under article 226 for issuing appropriate writ for quashing them on the ground that they are incompetent, without his being obliged to wait until those proceedings run their full course." The honourable Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Mangal Textile Mills India Private Limited reported in [2010] 14 SCC 553, quoted the observations of the earlier judgment of t....