9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the charging provision has to be tested on different touchstone and held that the eligibility clause in relation to an exemption notification is given strict meaning and the notification has to be interpreted in terms of its language, however, once an assessee satisfies the eligibility clause, the exemption clause therein may be construed literally. Relying upon M/s GAMMON INDIA LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI [2011 (7) TMI 17 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] SC while rejecting the plea of the appellant that the exemption notification should receive a liberal construction to further the object underlying it relied upon NOVOPAN INDIA LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX. AND CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD [1994 (9) TMI 67 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] -The principle that in case of ambiguity, a taxing statute should be construed in favour of the assessee, assuming that the said principle is good and sound—does not apply to the construction of an exception or an exempting provision; they have to be construed strictly - A person invoking an exception or an exemption provision to relieve him of the tax liability must establish clearly that he is covered by the said provision. In case of doubt or ambig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tled to derive the benefit of the notification dated 25.06.2001 - Judgment and order passed by the High Court set aside and appeal allowed – Decided in favour of Revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 3 per cent on sale in the course of inter-state trade in respect of its products; that the returns had been correctly filed and that the tax was validly deposited at the rate of 3 per cent. 9. After the issuance of the aforesaid letter/notice, the authorities by their letter dated 13.05.2004, rejected its stand and informed that the respondent would be liable to pay tax at the rate of 4 per cent on its inter-state sales if made to a registered dealer and at the rate of 12 per cent if made to an unregistered dealer. 10. Further, the respondent-assessee was informed by the authorities that the product manufactured by him is glassware and, therefore, not covered under the notification by letter dated 13.07.2004. 11. The respondent-dealer, being aggrieved by the communications dated 09.01.2004, 13.05.2004 and 13.07.2004 had filed a Writ Petition before the High Court, inter alia, requesting the Court to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the aforesaid letters and direct the authorities under the Act to extend the benefit of the notification, which has come into force with effect from 16.06.2001. 12. The High Court, after a detailed consideration of the issue before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation issued by the State Government. A dissection of the notification would indicate the following, namely : a) the Governor of Jharkhand in exercise of his powers under clause (b) of sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Act has issued the notification; b) the notification speaks of reduction of the rate of tax under the Act; c) the reduced rate of tax is from 4% to 3%; d) the notification further provides that no statutory forms are required for the sale of the types of glass or glass sheets which are made to the registered dealers under the Act; e) if the sales of "all types of glass and glass-sheets" are made to unregistered dealers then the rate of tax would be at 12 per cent. 19. We do not concur with the proposition put forth by Shri S.D. Sanjay, learned senior counsel that a notification which grants tax incentives should to be liberally construed in support of his submission. It is settled rule of construction of a notification that at the outset a strict approach ought to be adopted in administering whether a dealer/ manufacturer is covered by it at all and if the dealer/manufacturer falls within the notification, then the provisions of the notification be liberally ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uity, a taxing statute should be construed in favour of the assessee-- assuming that the said principle is good and sound--does not apply to the construction of an exception or an exempting provision; they have to be construed strictly. A person invoking an exception or an exemption provision to relieve him of the tax liability must establish clearly that he is covered by the said provision. In case of doubt or ambiguity, benefit of it must go to the State. This is for the reason explained in Mangalore Chemicals and other decisions viz. each such exception/exemption increases the tax burden on other members of the community correspondingly. Once, of course, the provision is found applicable to him, full effect must be given to it. As observed by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Hansraj Gordhandas v. CCE and Customs that such a notification has to be interpreted in the light of the words employed by it and not on any other basis. This was so held in the context of the principle that in a taxing statute, there is no room for any intendment, that regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words and that the matter should be governed wholly by the language of the notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ypes of wax would include animal, vegetable, petroleum, mineral or synthetic wax whereas the form of wax could be candles, lubricant wax, sealing wax, etc. 27. Admittedly, glassware is a form of glass and it is contended by the assessee that forms of glass are also covered by the said notification. The term glassware would generally encompass ornaments, objects and articles made from glass. The New Oxford Dictionary, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary and the Macmillian Dictionary refer to the said general meaning while defining it. Glassware would include crockery such as drinking vessels (drinkware) and tableware and general glass items such as vases, pots, etc. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that the expression "types of glass" could have been intended to refer to or include "forms of glass". 28. In the present case, the respondentdealer is a manufacturer of glassware. In our considered view, the glassware so manufactured by the respondent-dealer though made of glass cannot be considered or called as a "type of glass" in light of the aforesaid discussion and since the notification only provides for the reduction in the rate of tax of types of glass and not for "forms of glass" w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
