9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 913X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese are two revisions against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal dated 31.07.2014 arising out of the two Appeals No.81 of 2014 giving rise to TTR No.98 of 2014 and Appeal No.82 of 2014 giving rise to TTR No.97 of 2014. Therefore both these revisions are being disposed of by a common order since the question of facts and law involved in both the cases are similar. The revisionist is a Transp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner, Mobile Squad, Faizabad, however, examined the documents on record and found that the consignment of Supari was being carried out in pouches and on each pouch, it was mentioned 'Pooja Sugandhit Supari" and on the other side it was written ingredients "Betel nut, Cardamom, Clove, Contams Added flavour." It is on the basis of this evidence that the Assistant Commissioner, Mobile Squad, F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal. The Tribunal also recorded a finding, so far as the goods are concerned, to be valued at Rs. 2,70,000/- and on the same determined the demand of security of Rs. 1,08,000/- and so far as the nature of consignment was concerned, it was held that the same was Scented Supari and not Meethi Supari. I have heard Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Sanjieva Shankhdhar, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any sugar or sweetener and the fact that the on the pouch itself it was described as Pooja Scented Supari, the consignment was held to be Scented Supari which being an unclassified item was liable to tax at 14%. This being a finding of fact based upon the nature of the ingredients and its contents mentioned on the consignment itself, I do not find any error in the finding of fact recorded by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t all by the authorities below. In this view of the matter on the issue no.1, in my opinion, the findings of the Tribunal as well as the Joint Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner cannot survive and deserve to be quashed. The order of the Tribunal dated 31.07.2014 order dated 5.6.2014 of Joint Commissioner and of the Assistant Commissioner dated 28.5.2014 are therefore quashed so far as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
