9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (10) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants are registered dealers under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act and are dealing in purchasing "leco" from Neyveli Lignite Corporation. Leco is not mentioned in any of the entries in the Schedules of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. However, over the years leco was considered as coal subject to duty under entry 1 of the Fourth Schedule to the Act. The entry reads as under?: "Coal including coke in all its forms but excluding charcoal." The assessments of the appellants were completed for all years prior to assessment order 1988-89 by subjecting leco to duty at 4 per cent in accordance with rate prescribed under entry 1 of the Fourth Schedule. While the assessment for the year 1989-90 was under process, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the circular issued by the Commissioner was under misconception that this Court had held that leco is equivalent to charcoal. It was urged that leco is not a charcoal but falls under entry 1 of the Fourth Schedule, i.e., coal in all its form but excluding charcoal. The learned counsel submitted and in our judgment, with considerable merit, that charcoal is manufactured from burning wood while leco is part of coal which comes from coal field. The distinction between the coal and leco is that leco is not a refined article, while the coal is one, but both coal and leco are taken out from the coal mines. In our judgment, leco cannot be equated with charcoal and consequently the ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned single Judge was not right in giving interpretation to enable the trader to get the benefit of exemption. In our judgment, the liability to pay duty for leco is under entry 1 of the Fourth Schedule and the circular is erroneous. The consequential action taken by the authorities by service of notice dated July 22, 1991, must also be quashed. 5.. Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed and the judgment dated August 27, 1991, passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 18383 and 18384 of 1991 as well as circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes on May 21, 1991, is quashed. The assessment order dated May 25, 1991, passed by the Commercial Tax Officer for the assessment year 1989-90 is also set aside and the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
