1990 (7) TMI 352 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Determining whether laminated high density polyethylene fabric qualifies as synthetic waterproof fabric for exemption from sales tax under U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with the interpretation of a notification dated June 5, 1985, regarding the exemption from sales tax for certain fabrics. The petitioner claimed that laminated HDPE fabric should be exempt as synthetic waterproof fabric under clause (vi) of the notification. The department argued that HDPE fabrics, whether laminated or unlaminated, were excluded from exemptions. The court examined the relevant provisions of the notification and previous notifications to understand the context. The court also referred to judicial pronouncements on similar matters to aid in the interpretation of terms like "artificial silk fabrics."

The court considered the manufacturing process of HDPE fabrics, including lamination, and the resulting waterproof nature of the fabric. Previous decisions, such as Plastipack Private Ltd. case and Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Kanpur Plastic Pack (P.) Ltd., were cited to support the classification of HDPE fabrics as synthetic fabrics. Additionally, reference was made to the broad interpretation of the term "fabric" in tax laws, as established in cases like Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan and State of Tamil Nadu v. Polyweb Private Ltd.

The court rejected the department's argument that lamination did not change the basic character of HDPE fabrics. It held that laminated HDPE fabrics fell under clause (vi) of the notification as synthetic waterproof fabrics, entitling them to exemption from sales tax. The court emphasized the principle of favoring the subject in interpreting fiscal statutes, citing various Supreme Court judgments to support its decision.

Regarding the availability of alternative remedies, the court referred to the State of U.P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. case to justify entertaining the writ petition despite the existence of appeal options. The court allowed the petition, restraining the respondents from collecting tax on laminated HDPE fabrics and ordering refunds if taxes were already collected. The judgment was delivered at the admission stage with no costs imposed on the parties.

In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, granting exemption for laminated HDPE fabrics as synthetic waterproof fabrics under the relevant notification. The judgment highlighted the importance of interpreting tax laws in favor of the subject and justified the court's decision to entertain the writ petition despite alternative remedies being available.