TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1767X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neris to the articles mentioned under Entry 17, which are cow dung, wood ash, poultry manure, green manure, compost, town compost, fish manure; organic manure can only be that produced or derived naturally from animals or plants not otherwise subjected to a manufacturing or chemical process - The purpose of Entry 17 is not to include all 'organic substances' within its fold. The report of the Agricultural University also states the the product 'Ecohume' is a growth promoter or a growth stimulant; which offers no aid to decide on the classification. A similar question came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in Nelkadir Bone Industries v. Commercial Tax Officer, [2013 (5) TMI 29 - KERALA HIGH COURT], wherein the question that arose was whether the legislature was justified in including bone meal, under the head fertilizer in Entry 57(V) of the I Schedule to the Act instead of showing the same as organic manure in Entry 17 of third schedule of the KGST Act, and whether it is arbitrary and unreasonable and liable to be declared as organic manure entitled for exemption - it was held that Since it has been held that 'bone meal' did not qualify to be an organi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the basis of the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), South Zonal Bench, Bangalore. The assessee filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and vide the impugned order dated 25.06.2008 in T.A.No.156/2007, the appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded with respect to the credit notes, to the Assessing Authority. The Tribunal relied upon the certificates produced by the assessee at Annexures D and E as well as the order of the CESTAT and remanded the matter for the limited purpose to ascertain whether the turnover is in respect of sale of 'Ecohume' and categorically directed the Assessing Authority to grant exemption for the sale of 'Ecohume'. This finding of the Tribunal has been challenged before us in this Revision. 4. The learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the Revenue argues that the Tribunal went wrong in finding that the product is an organic manure, because even according to the assessee the product is a 'bio pesticide' and therefore, exemption under Entry 17 of Third Schedule of the Act could not have been granted, and that the product would come under entry 47 of First Schedule. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from asbestos boards and two types of asbestos fabrics were sought to be brought under Central Excise Tariff under Entry 22F as asbestos fibres and yarn . The manufacturer claimed that these intermediate products are brittle and fragile and not marketable at all. The Tribunal, however, found that a manufacturer of brake linings and clutch facings, who did not have the facility to manufacture asbestos fabric could purchase such intermediate products. The Honourable Supreme Court, in the cited decision, held that the onus of establishing that the product fell under Entry 22F lay upon the Revenue. The distinction insofar as the present case is that the claim is one of exemption and the assessee themselves had projected their product as a pesticide. 7. It is for the assessee to prove that their product 'Ecohume' would come within the classification of Entry 17 of the Act and therefore, entitled to exemption. Annexure D is a certificate issued by Dr. T.G. Prasad, Professor Head, Department of Crop Physiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Another certificate produced at Annexure E is issued by the Director, Fredrick Institute of Plant Protection and Toxi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duct is Organic. That does not mean it is an 'organic manure', as covered under the Third Schedule. The purpose of Entry 17 is not to include all 'organic substances' within its fold. The report of the Agricultural University also states the the product 'Ecohume' is a growth promoter or a growth stimulant; which offers no aid to decide on the classification. 9. A similar question came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in Nelkadir Bone Industries v. Commercial Tax Officer, 2013 (2) KLT 477, wherein the question that arose was whether the legislature was justified in including bone meal, under the head fertilizer in Entry 57(V) of the I Schedule to the Act instead of showing the same as organic manure in Entry 17 of third schedule of the KGST Act, and whether it is arbitrary and unreasonable and liable to be declared as organic manure entitled for exemption. It was held thus: Further, the organic manure enumerated in Entry 17 of the third schedule are the crude form of manure obtained in a natural manner with less manufacturing technique, and used as such in the agricultural operation. Further, the produce of organic manu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
