2017 (1) TMI 194 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Classification of goods - items used in installation of Poles and Wires etc - Entry tax - whether the items fall under entry 22 to come within the purview of entry tax? - Held that - the controversy stands set at rest by the Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of M/s. Harit Polytech Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (3) TMI 828 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT , where the court has upheld the validity of Entry Tax by respective state governments. Therefore, insofar as the legal issue is concerned, it is answered against the petitioner. The Tax Board, after elaborate discussion, has taken into consideration and has held that insofar as the remaining 7 items are concerned, they fall within the purview of entry 22, and thus within the purview of Entry Tax and in my view both the Tax Board as well as Additional Commissioner have found as a finding of fact and in the limited jurisdiction of revision petition the question of fact cannot be considered or interfered with, it being essentially a finding of fact. Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against the order of Rajasthan Tax Board regarding Entry Tax on certain items.
2. Interpretation of whether the items fall within the ambit of Entry Tax.
3. Legal validity of levying Entry Tax under Article 304(a) & (b) of the Constitution.
4. Dispute over the classification of specific items under Entry Tax.
5. Application of Division Bench judgment and Apex court ruling on the validity of Entry Tax.

Analysis:
1. The petition challenges the Rajasthan Tax Board's order on Entry Tax applicability to 20 items. The petitioner, a power distribution Corporation, sought clarification on whether these items attract Entry Tax. The Additional Commissioner determined that 12 items were exempt, but 8 fell under Entry Tax. The Tax Board further examined the issue, concluding that 7 items were subject to Entry Tax, while one item was exempt.

2. The petitioner contested the legality of Entry Tax under Article 304(a) & (b) of the Constitution. They argued that the 7 disputed items were essential parts used in their operations and not subject to Entry Tax. The petitioner highlighted the common utility of these items like Earthing Chain, Insulated mats, and Meter Box. They claimed that these items were integral to their daily operations and should not be taxed.

3. The respondent defended the levy of Entry Tax, citing a Division Bench judgment and an Apex court ruling validating the tax. They argued that the legal issue of Entry Tax applicability had been settled by these precedents, including the case of M/s. Harit Polytech Pvt. Ltd. The respondent emphasized that the Tax Board's decision was based on factual findings and should not be challenged as a question of law.

4. The court upheld the validity of Entry Tax based on previous judgments and dismissed the petitioner's arguments against its legality. Regarding the 7 disputed items, the court sided with the Tax Board's classification under Entry Tax entry 22. The court emphasized that these findings were factual and not open to legal challenge in a revision petition. Consequently, no legal questions were deemed to arise from the Tax Board's order, leading to the dismissal of the petition for lack of merit.