9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 159 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxKGST assessments & CST assessment - detergents, cleaning agents and laundry brightners. - Whether the item falls under entry 51 and if not necessarily it has to be consigned to the residuary entry under entry 177 which provides for rate of tax at 8% - held that - Assessee s product claimed in the product description produced in Court is very much a cleaning agent because on washing with it toilet commodes and wash basins look absolutely clean, sparkling & shining. - the additional feature or advantage of the product to act as a disinfectant along with the main use as a cleaning agent does not affect the product identity as a cleaning material. - the product in effect is a cleaning agent cum disinfectant and is squarely covered by Entry 51. - Decided against the assessee. Stock transfer - F form - held that - the assessee has proved exemption to the tune of Rs.30 lakhs and balance stock transfer value of Rs.20 lakhs is disallowed for want of conclusive evidence. Here again, having regard to the documents produced, which includes even F-forms issued by the consignees, we feel assessee is entitled to partial relief. - Decided partly in favor of assessee.
Issues:
1. Classification of a product under KGST Act. 2. Addition of amounts in assessments for different years. Issue 1: Classification of a product under KGST Act: The revision petitions concern the classification of a product named Domex under the KGST Act. The petitioner argues that Domex should be assessed at 8% as an unclassified item, while the Department contends it falls under Entry 51 of the First Schedule, warranting a 12% tax rate. The product, a disinfectant used for cleaning toilet commodes, is claimed by the petitioner to be a cleaning agent and not specifically covered by any entry. The Tribunal upheld the classification under Entry 51, considering Domex as a cleaning agent cum disinfectant falling within the ambit of the entry. The Court analyzed the product description, emphasizing that the additional disinfectant property does not alter its identity as a cleaning agent, thereby affirming the Tribunal's decision and rejecting the revisions. Issue 2: Addition of amounts in assessments for different years: In S.T.Rev.No.131/2010, an issue arose regarding the addition of Rs.20 lakhs, reduced to Rs.15 lakhs by the Tribunal, due to missing delivery notes. The Court further reduced this amount to Rs.10 lakhs based on the estimation of turnover. In S.T.Rev.No.132/2010, an addition of Rs.6,67,200 was contested, with the Court acknowledging a technical flaw in the records but reducing the addition to Rs.3 lakhs, considering the penalty already recovered and the time elapsed. S.T.Rev.No.155/2010 did not warrant interference as the Tribunal had already granted partial relief. Lastly, in S.T.Rev.No.128/2010 concerning CST assessment for 2003-04, a dispute over disallowance of stock transfer amounting to over Rs.20 lakhs was addressed. The Court upheld a disallowance of Rs.10 lakhs, granting partial relief based on the documents provided by the assessee, including F-forms issued by consignees. In conclusion, the Court allowed S.T.Rev.Nos.131, 132 & 128/2010 in part, while dismissing S.T.Rev.No.155/2010.
|
