2015 (12) TMI 226 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Denial of exemption claim under Section 41 - whether the goods sold namely Electronic Control Panel were classifiable under Schedule Entry No. C-II-135 or as claimed in the appellate order by the dealer - Held that - It was reassessed for the period from 2000-2001 by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Worli, Mumbai. The dealer is a manufacturer of Engineering goods covered by Schedule Entry C-II 123. The claim of the dealer was that it has sold this Electronic Control Panel against the declaration in Form-A to M/s Sun Earth Chemicals Ltd. However, that claim was disallowed on the ground that the Notification Entry A-88 is applicable to the goods covered by the Schedule Entry C-II-135. That was challenged and the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax allowed the dealer s appeal and set aside reassessment order. - The claim of the dealer is therefore covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of MRF Limited(2010 (2) TMI 1090 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT). Once the Revenue concedes to this position, particularly on the facts of this case and the issue raised is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court, then, no question of law arises for our consideration and opinion. The Tribunal is right in rejecting the Reference Application by holding that the factual matter is sought to be reagitated by the Revenue - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of Reference Application by the Sales Tax Tribunal.
2. Classification of goods under Schedule Entry No. C-II-135.

Analysis:
1. The High Court considered the Tribunal's order in Appeal No. 8 of 2008 and the subsequent rejection of Reference Application No.63 of 2011. The Revenue contended that the Reference Application was wrongly rejected by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had found that the issue of fact and law was against the Revenue, as per the detailed order passed on 27th January, 2015. The Revenue sought to challenge the classification of goods sold by the dealer, namely Electronic Control Panel, under Schedule Entry No. C-II-135. However, the Tribunal found that the issue was already settled by a previous judgment of the High Court, and there was no legal question to be considered. Therefore, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the Reference Application.

2. The dispute revolved around the classification of the Electronic Control Panel sold by the dealer. The Revenue argued that the dealer, being a manufacturer of Engineering goods covered by Schedule Entry C-II 123, was not entitled to claim exemption under Section 41 for the goods sold. The dealer had sold the Electronic Control Panel to a specific company, but the claim for exemption was disallowed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax initially allowed the dealer's appeal, but the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax later disallowed the claim. The Tribunal, upon review, found that the issue was not a new one and was already settled by a Division Bench judgment of the High Court. The Tribunal concluded that there was no question of law to be considered, as the matter was factual and had been previously adjudicated. Therefore, the Tribunal's decision to reject the Reference Application was upheld by the High Court, emphasizing that the Revenue was attempting to re-litigate a settled issue.