9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred to as the Act) by which it has held that the Inverter and UPSS (Uninterrupted Power Supply System) are the electrical implements and not electronic goods as such trade tax at the rate of 10% was payable on the sale of these goods and trade tax at the rate of 12% was payable on the sale of battery and as the petitioner has paid trade tax on these goods at the rate of 4% as such liability of differential amount has been assessed upon him. The petitioner has further prayed for mandamus directing the respondents not to realize the trade tax liability in pursuance of the aforesaid assessment order. 3. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner was carrying on business of purchase and sale of Inverter, UPSS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ters, and UPSSs are 'power supply devices' and trade tax at the rate of 4% was payable on it. The impugned order, being contrary to the appellate order inter-partes for the Assessment Year 2003-04 as well as judgements of this Court, is liable to be set aside. 4. The respondents have filed Counter Affidavit in which it has been stated that Inverters, and UPSs are electrical goods and trade tax at the rate of 10% was payable on it. The Commissioner of Trade Tax U.P. has issued a Circular dated 03.11.2003 clarifying the legal position that trade tax at the rate of 10% was payable on sale of Inverters, and UPSs. The impugned Assessment order does not suffer from any illegality. 5. The learned Special Counsel for State of U.P. raised a prelim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our of the petitioner by this Court or the issue still requires to be decided by the fact finding authority. 6. The counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgements of Single Judge of this Court in Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. Luminous Electronics Ltd., (2010) 44 NTN 162 which has been followed in Trade Tax Revision No. 3232 of 2004 The Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. M/S Sindoze Electronics, decided on 19.12.2012 and judgement dated 05.08.2008 passed in Trade Tax Revision No. 1560 of 2000, The Commissioner of Trade Tax U.P. Vs. M/S Astrol Power System and argued that in these cases, this Court has held that the Inverters are electronic components. We have examined these judgements, in which it was found that as the Tribunal had discus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SSs are electronic components. 7. In the impugned assessment order, the controversy was in respect of Inverters, UPSSs, and Batteries. On these goods the petitioner has paid trade tax at the rate of 4% while the Assessing Officer has assessed the trade tax liability on Inverters and UPSSs at the rate of 10% and on batteries at the rate of 12%. The assessment order so far as it is related to the batteries, is not challenged before us and the counsel for the petitioner has not argued in this respect. The counsel for the petitioner has disputed tax liability on Inverters and UPSSs as such we confine this judgement in that respect only. 8. In exercise of powers under Section 3-A of U.P. Trade Tax Act, State of U.P. has issued Government KN.NI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, diodes and other active components, transistors, integrated circuits, large scale integration, very large scale integration chips, black and white picture tubes, colour picture tubes, power semiconductors, audio tapes and video tapes, printed circuit boards, connectors, relay, auto electronic components, precision electronic components, magnetic media micro wave tube, television components, television glass shells, electronic transducers, actuators, display devices that is light emitting diodes, liquid crystal diodes, micro motors, crystals, tape deck mechanism, etched and framed foils, electronic tuners, deflection yokes, line output transformers, electrodeposited copper foils, printed circuit board, laminate, populated printed circuit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax U.P. has considered the various factors before deciding that Inverter and UPSS are electrical goods. This Court, in M/S Microtek International Pvt Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2010) 44 NTN 59 (D.B), relying upon the judgements of Apex Court in State of Goa and others Vs. Leukoplast (India) Ltd., 1997 UPTC 512 and Raj Kumar Shivhare Vs. Assistant Director of Enforcement & another, JT 2010 (4) SC 54 has remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer, in stead of relegating the petitioner for filing the appeal, to decide the controversy as to whether the Inverters and UPSs are electronic component or electrical implement. This judgment has been followed by this Bench in Writ Tax No. 813 of 2007 M/S P.C.I. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
