2018 (9) TMI 1109 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Jurisdiction - Competency of the State and its functionaries to impose Commercial Tax/ Value Added Tax on Indian Made Foreign Liquor / Rectified Spirit - Held that - Since the present batch of writ petitions relates to assessment year 2011-12 & 2012-13, they are allowed in the same terms in GWALIOR ALCOBREW PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY GWALIOR DISTILLERS LTD.) RAIRU FARM AGRAM MUMBAI ROAD GWALIOR VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 2016 (9) TMI 355 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT and UNITED SPIRITS LIMITED 2016 (10) TMI 208 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT . The impugned action in the form of assessment order, order passed by the Revisional Authority, Appellate Authority or the show cause notice and proceedings initiated thereon are quashed - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Competency of the State to impose Commercial Tax/ Value Added Tax on Indian Made Foreign Liquor / Rectified Spirit under the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 and the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2002.

Analysis:
The judgment addressed the issue of the State's competency to impose Commercial Tax/ Value Added Tax on Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) and Rectified Spirit under the relevant Acts. The Court referred to a previous decision where it was held that the State cannot charge export duty on excisable goods as it falls under the Union Government's jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that duty payable on IMFL exported from Madhya Pradesh is essentially excise duty, not export duty, as it is levied at the point of export. The Court highlighted the detailed procedure for exporting foreign liquor under the M.P. Foreign Liquor Rules, indicating that IMFL manufactured in Madhya Pradesh is an excisable good subject to duty. Despite certain benefits or exemptions granted by the State, IMFL remains a taxable good under the Excise Act. The Court interpreted the relevant entries in the Commercial Tax Act and VAT Act to conclude that imposition of duty under these Acts is impermissible on IMFL exported from Madhya Pradesh.

In another case, the Court reiterated that the principles established in a previous case apply to IMFL and Rectified Spirit assessments before a specific amendment date. The Court held that as the assessment years predate the amendment, the previous principles must be followed. The Court quashed assessment orders, revisional orders, and show cause notices based on the earlier decision. The Court declined to delve into other questions raised in the petitions, leaving them open for future consideration if necessary. The learned Government Advocate eventually acknowledged the issue's resolution in the previous case, leading to the petitions being allowed for the same reasons as the earlier judgments. As the petitions related to specific assessment years, they were allowed in line with previous decisions, resulting in the quashing of impugned actions.

In conclusion, the Court affirmed the State's inability to levy Commercial Tax/ Value Added Tax on IMFL and Rectified Spirit exported from Madhya Pradesh based on the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and previous judgments. The judgments provided clarity on the taxation of excisable goods and upheld the principles established in earlier cases, leading to the quashing of assessment orders and related actions in the present petitions.