TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commercial Taxes shall examine this aspect and a decision shall be taken in accordance with law. The Commissioner’s clarification impugned at Annexure-E to Writ Petition No.51431/2017 is quashed - matter is remanded to Respondent No.1-Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to examine the issue in the light of the observations made as aforesaid and take a decision in accordance with law in an expedite manner - petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P. Nos. 15749/2017 & 53072 – 53082/2017 c/w W.P. No.51431/2017 (T – RES) - - - Dated:- 27-2-2018 - MRS. S. SUJATHA J. Petitioner: (By Sri Harish V.S., Adv.) Respondents: (By Sri T.K. Vedamurthy, AGA.) ORDER Since common questions are involved in these matters, the same are heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es held that the said activity of the petitioner falls under Sl. No.23 of Sixth Schedule and liable to tax at 14.5% which is wholly unjustifiable and contrary to the legislative intent. A reading of Sl. No.8 printing; block making by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes as a whole, ignoring the semi-colon inserted by the legislature with an intention to read the two activities as different and distinct being lost sight of, the clarification of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes calls for interference by this Court. In support of his contentions, learned Counsel placed reliance on the Judgment of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench in the case of SHRI KANT TRIPATHI v. STATE OF U.P. reported in 1987 SCC Online All 120. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... more of the above categories liable to tax at 14.5% during the relevant period. It is thus clear that Sl.No.8 refers to printing; block making. That means printing and block making being two different and distinct activities has to be read with disjunction or without any inter-relation between the two activities. If it is mere printing or mere block making, certainly it falls under Sl.No.8 with rate of tax at 5.5%. It is also profitable to refer to the Judgment of the full Bench of Allahabad High Court wherein at paragraph-28, it is held thus: 28. These principles are equally relevant to the present case. The said proviso consists of two parts which are separated by a semi- colon mark in between. The Semi-colon has been put immedia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Tax Act, 1957. In that context, this Court held that clarification issued by the Authority for clarification and advance ruling that digital printing is a works contract liable to tax under Section 5B of the Act under Entry 43 of the Sixth Schedule to the Act is justifiable. 8. As aforesaid, it is not in dispute that the contract involved herein is a works contract. That being the situation, this Judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case. Similarly, in REPROMEN OFFSET PRINTERS case supra, the Division Bench of this Court was considering whether posters, vinyl hoardings, printed fabric banners etc., which are used for publicity can be brought under Entry-71 are altogether different from that of items with the Assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he issue in the light of the observations made as aforesaid and take a decision in accordance with law in an expedite manner, in any event not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open. In view of the clarification of the Commissioner being set aside, the assessment orders passed by the prescribed Authority based on the said clarification also requires to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. 11. The matter is remanded to the prescribed Authority to re do the assessment in accordance with law, based on the decision to be taken by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in the light of the observations made by this Court as narrated above. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
