9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ery branded products, there is a well reasoned Division Bench judgment of another High Court in Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Assam [2009 (4) TMI 853 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT]. It is a settled proposition that in tax matters, when there is a Division Bench judgment of another High Court on a similar provision, it has to be treated with due respect and in the instant case, since the Guwahati High Court has taken a view that the potato chips sold by the appellant under the same brand name "Lays" and "Uncle Chips" are held to be classifiable as processed vegetables and not to come under a residuary entry which is according to us also otherwise correct, there is no reason for us to take a different view. - Writ Appeal No. 551 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etables including fruit jam, jelly, (. . .)(2), fruit squash, paste, fruit drink and fruit juice (whether in sealed containers or otherwise), other than those specified in the Fourth Schedule. It is submitted that there is also a residuary entry, which is entry 69 of Part C of the First Schedule to the Act, which is to apply to any other goods not specified in any of the Schedules. As far as entry 107 is concerned, the tax payable would be at the rate of four per cent, whereas under entry 69, the tax payable would be at the rate of 12.5 per cent. The case of the appellant is that what they are selling are only potato chips which are fried chips made out of potatoes and they would fall under the head processed vegetables . It is submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e apex court in Mauri Yeast India Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. reported in [2008] 14 VST 259; [2008] 5 SCC 680. That was in the context of the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the entries thereunder. We have also been shown the judgment of a Division Bench of the Guwahati High Court in Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Assam reported in [2009] 25 VST 41. In that matter, the potato chips sold by the appellant under the same brand name Lays and Uncle Chips are held to be classifiable as processed vegetables and not to come under a residuary entry. The product is under the same brand name and that is how the judgment is rendered with respect to the relevant entries under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The learned c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances, no fruitful purpose would be served by directing the appellant to go for an assessment and for that reason, not to entertain the writ petition. That apart, in the present case, for the very branded products, there is a well reasoned Division Bench judgment of another High Court. It is a settled proposition that in tax matters, when there is a Division Bench judgment of another High Court on a similar provision, it has to be treated with due respect and in the instant case, since the Guwahati High Court has taken a view, which is according to us also otherwise correct, there is no reason for us to take a different view. For all these reasons, the writ appeal is allowed. The order of the learned single Judge is quashed and s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
