9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. 2.. The relevant facts are stated with reference to W.P. No. 13054 of 1987. The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ("the Act"). The petitioner buys leco from M/s. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited. According to the petitioner it is a trade name and it is ordinarily understood as charcoal used as domestic fuel. The petitioner sells le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oal, while the Revenue wants to levy tax on leco by treating it as coal. 3.. The Revenue relies on the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Punjab Coal & Kutti Farm [1981] 47 STC 351. In the said decision Nalidar Coal was held to be coal for the purpose of levying sales tax. Now it is well-known that while interpreting items for the purpose of taxation the cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to be amended to clarify the matter. I do not think that I can ignore the above decision and venture upon an investigation again to see whether leco is coal or charcoal. In view of the ratio of the aforesaid decision, leco will have to be held as charcoal and if so the petitioners in all these petitions are entitled to succeed. 4.. Consequently, all these petitions are allowed. Rule made absolu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
