9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (4) TMI 811 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxWhether in facts and circumstances of case, the Tribunal was right inholding that product gypsum board is covered by entry C-41 in respect of gypsum in all its forms? Held that - As the Tribunal noted the appellant had proceeded to hold that it is not covered by the entry purely based on the classification in the Customs Tariff Act. As the tribunal rightly noted this is irrelevant for the purpose of considering the entry in the Maharashtra Sales Tax Act or VAT Act. What has to be considered is the entry in the schedule. It may also be noted that in other states also similar expressions have been used in so far as Gypsum is concerned. In so far as State of West Bengal is concerned, the Gypsum Board and Gypsum Plaster are specifically excluded. Therefore, the expression forms and description will have to mean gypsum of any shape and whatever description it may have in the market as long as chemical composition remains the same. In our opinion, in so far as VAT is concerned, gypsum Board will be covered by the entry C-41. We therefore, find no fault in the judgment of the Tribunal. Against assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of Gypsum Board under Entry C-41 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax (MVAT) Act. 2. Determination of the applicable tax rate for Gypsum Board. 3. Interpretation of the term "all forms and descriptions" in the context of the MVAT Act. Detailed Analysis: 1. Classification of Gypsum Board under Entry C-41 of the MVAT Act: The core issue was whether Gypsum Board falls under the expression "all forms and descriptions" of gypsum as per Entry C-41 of the MVAT Act. The respondent argued that Gypsum Board, primarily composed of gypsum (99%), should be classified under this entry. The appellant contended that "forms of gypsum" should be limited to hydrated or dehydrated forms and not extend to products manufactured from gypsum. The court examined the manufacturing process of Gypsum Board, which involves converting gypsum into hemihydrate gypsum and then into a board form with added paper and additives. The court referred to the Supreme Court's interpretation in similar cases, emphasizing that the term "form" includes any shape or structure, thus concluding that Gypsum Board, despite being a finished product, retains its primary composition as gypsum and should be classified under Entry C-41. 2. Determination of the applicable tax rate for Gypsum Board: Initially, the appellant had determined that Gypsum Board was taxable at 12.5% under Entry E-I. However, the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal set aside this order, ruling that Gypsum Board should be taxed at 4% under Entry 41 of Schedule C. The court upheld the tribunal's decision, stating that the legislative intent behind the term "all forms and descriptions" was to include gypsum in any shape or form, including Gypsum Board. Therefore, the applicable tax rate for Gypsum Board was determined to be 4%. 3. Interpretation of the term "all forms and descriptions" in the context of the MVAT Act: The court analyzed various entries in the MVAT Act, noting the different terminologies used, such as "all forms," "in any form," "specified forms," etc. The court emphasized that the legislature's use of the term "all forms and descriptions" in Entry C-41 was intentional and expansive. It referred to the Supreme Court's rulings in State of Gujarat v. Sakharwala Brothers and Trutuf Safety Glass Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., which highlighted that such terms should be interpreted broadly to cover all shapes, structures, and manifestations of the commodity. The court concluded that Gypsum Board, being a form of gypsum, falls within the ambit of "all forms and descriptions" as intended by the legislature. Conclusion: The court affirmed the tribunal's decision, holding that Gypsum Board is covered under Entry C-41 of the MVAT Act and is liable for tax at the rate of 4%. The question was answered in the affirmative, favoring the respondents and against the appellant, thereby upholding the broader interpretation of "all forms and descriptions" to include Gypsum Board.
|
