9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 under section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 without being influenced by any circular or clarification of the first respondent herein such as Lr. No. VAT. Cell/14548/2008 A1 dated June 6, 2008 and the writ petition in W.P. No. 17013 of 2008 is filed to quash the records on the file of the first respondent in Lr. No. VAT. Cell/14548/2008 A1 dated June 6, 2008 confirming the earlier circular in Lr. No. VAT. Cell/28171/07 (VCC 760) dated June 26, 2007. According to the petitioner, they are a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act with their registered office at 7th and 8th Floor, D-Shivasagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai 400 018. They have a factory at Manzurgarh, Aliga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t as milk solids, 3.06 litres of milk is necessary for manufacture of 500 gm of Complan finished product. To manufacture Complan, the petitioner processes approximately 85,000 tonnes of milk every year. The Tamil Nadu value added tax has been implemented within the State of Tamil Nadu by the enactment of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as, "the VAT Act") with effect from January 1, 2007. The products which fall under serial No. 82 of Part B to the First Schedule to the said Act are milk food and milk products (including flavoured milk, skimmed milk powder, tinned, bottled or packed), baby milk food, paneer, milk power and UHT milk. The products which fall under serial No. 69 of Part C to the First Schedule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... produced. According to the respondents, as the clarification so issued by the first respondent was against availing of lesser rate of four per cent tax, the petitioner has directly approached this court by way of the present writ petitions. The respondents have further stated that the claim of the petitioner is that their product by name "Complan" would fall under the term "milk food and milk products" in entry 82 of Part B to the First Schedule of the VAT Act taxable at four per cent and not under the residuary entry as contained in entry 69 of Part C to the First Schedule of the VAT Act taxable at 12.5 per cent. When the petitioner approached the first respondent for clarification, they were clarified that the product is eligible to tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im by the VAT Act to issue any clarification regarding VAT Act, the clarification dated June 26, 2007 issued by him has no legal force and therefore the assessing officers are legally not bound to act on such clarification. Heard Mr. N. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.C. Manibharathi, learned Government Advocate (Taxes). Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the impugned order dated June 6, 2008 indicates complete non-application of mind, despite the petitioner having placed on record relevant evidence to show that milk products predominate in Complan. He would also contend that the first respondent ought to have seen that Complan has been recognised to be a milk food even by the Government of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re (Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying), New Delhi to Glaxo India Limited, the product "Complan" was certified as a milk product. After the taking over of the operations for the manufacture of Complan by the petitioner, an amended certificate dated March 14, 1995 was issued in favour of the petitioner, recognising the fact that the petitioner is involved in the manufacture of a milk product by name "Complan". As per the decision rendered in Horlick's case(1), the product "Horlicks" was classified as a milk product. Based on the said decision, the petitioner claims that their product "Complan" is a milk product and they also gain support to their claim from the amended certificate dated March 14, 1995 issued by the Government of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 of 2008 is not maintainable at this stage. However, the petitioner is directed to approach the competent assessing (1)State of Tamil Nadu v. Wander Ltd. [1990] 79 STC 421 (Mad.) authority and contest the matter by filing objections, agitating all the issues contended before this court within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such objections, the assessing authority is directed to consider the same for the assessment year 2007-08 under section 22 of the VAT Act and pass final assessment orders in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks. In fine, W.P. No. 17013 of 2008 is dismissed and W.P. No. 17012 of 2008 is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Consequently, con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
