2015 (12) TMI 1898 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Levy of Entry Tax - entry of raw material being brought into a local area for consumption in manufacturing of a new commodity - HELD THAT - The question of law has been decided by this Court in the case of THE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX LKO. VERSUS S/S MARINO INDUSTRIES LTD. 2014 (12) TMI 1422 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT wherein this Court has taken into consideration the finding of fact that the dealer was a manufacturer of laminated sheets using craft paper as raw material and not for packaging purposes and therefore the contention of the State has not been accepted by the Tribunal as it is only the goods specified in the schedule as notified by the State Government which is liable to be levied with entry tax. The goods as specified in the Notification specifically provide for paper for packing purposes and therefore that would not include the paper which is being used as raw material. The question of law is therefore decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Revision dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of entry tax on raw material in manufacturing process.

In the judgment delivered by the High Court, the issue at hand was the interpretation of the applicability of entry tax on the entry of raw material used in the manufacturing process of a new commodity. The State filed a revision against the Tribunal's order, questioning whether entry tax should be levied on the raw material brought into a local area for manufacturing or on the use of the manufactured commodity in that area. The Court referred to a previous case, Commissioner Commercial Tax, Lucknow vs. S/S Marino Industries Ltd, where it was established that entry tax is applicable only on goods specified in the notification by the State Government. The Court noted that the dealer in question was a manufacturer of laminated sheets using craft paper as raw material, not for packaging purposes. As the notification specified paper for packaging purposes, it was concluded that the raw material used in manufacturing did not fall under the category subject to entry tax.

The Court emphasized that the goods specified in the notification for entry tax included paper for packing purposes, which did not cover raw material used in manufacturing. Therefore, based on the interpretation of the law and the specific notification, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the revenue. The Court found that the revision lacked merit and subsequently dismissed it, without imposing any costs. The judgment clarified the distinction between goods subject to entry tax and raw materials used in manufacturing processes, providing a clear legal interpretation in favor of the assessee.