9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 713X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015 (11) TMI 326 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT] squarely cover the present case since facts and circumstances in both the cases are strikingly similar. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the hot rolled coil is processed into cold rolled coil in the industrial plant of the petitioner, same no longer remains a goods, so specified at Sl. No. 50(iv) of the Schedule attached to the Act of 2008. As such, exemption from entry tax under section 3(2) of the Act of 2008 cannot be claimed in respect of sale of such goods. The relevant part of the judgment is reproduced below: "Now, the incidence of entry tax as contemplated by the Act arises on the entry of specified goods into any local area for consumption, use or sale therein. The goods hot rolled coil is specifically enumerated under the Schedule of the Act. There is also no dispute that the petitioner imports specified goods into local area of Assam. His claim of exemption from entry tax is based on the argument that here occurs no consumption or lose of hot rolled coil in his activity of processing hot rolled coil into cold rolled coil. The chemical properties of both hot rolled coil and cold rolled coil are the same. The only difference is in their thickness. Therefore, according to him, the specified goods, namely, hot rolled coil imported by him are not for any consumption or use but for sale. Further, it do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specified in entry at Sl. No. 50 (iv) to the Schedule attached to the Act of 2008. We have considered the rival submissions, having regard to the decisions relied on. Before we proceed further, we find it necessary to reproduce the provision of section 3 of the Act of 2008 as well as the entry at Sl. No. 50(iv) to the Schedule attached to the Act of 2003. The section 3 of the Act of 2008 is reproduced below: "3. Levy of tax.-(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, there shall be levied and collected on entry tax on the entry of specified goods into any local area for consumption, use of sale therein, at the rates respectively specified against each item in the Schedule. The entry tax shall be leviable on the import value of the specified goods and shall be paid by every importer of such goods: Provided that no entry tax shall be levied under this section on the entry of specified goods into a local area, if it is proved to the satisfaction of the assessing authority, in such manner as may be prescribed, that such goods have already been subjected to entry tax or that the entry tax has been paid by the importer or any other person under this Act in respect of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the State Government in respect of any such goods shall not exceed twenty percentum." The Provisions of entry at Sl. No. 50(iv) is also reproduced below: "(iv) Sheets, hoops, strips and skelp, both black and galvanized, hot and cold rolled plain and corrugated, in all qualities, in straight lengths and in coil form, as rolled and in riveted condition." A conjoint reading of the above provision of law reveals that no entry tax on entry of goods, specified in Schedule, attached to the Act of 2008, which are brought into any local area is to be paid provided such specified goods are resold inside the State as the same specified goods and provided tax is payable under the Act of 2003 on the sale of such specified goods. Coming back to our present case, it is found that hot rolled coil, imported into local area in the State of Assam and the same is sold after processing it to a product which is called as cold rolled coil. It is found that both the products aforesaid are sold in coil form. Entry at Sl. No. 50 to the Schedule aforesaid reveals that sheets, hoops, strips and skelp, both in hot rolled coil as well as cold rolled coil, are specified goods and as such, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. We have already referred to entry relating to coke occurring under section 14(ia) of the Act. When the entry says 'coke in all its forms', there is no possibility of bringing coke of different forms except under this entry. The Joint Commissioner has clearly held that both raw petroleum coke and calcined petroleum coke, though different commercial commodities are 'declared goods'. However, he held that by process of manufacture, raw petroleum coke has lost its original identity and has resulted in a new product, namely, calcined petroleum coke. Therefore, according to him, the benefit under section 15(b) of the Act could be availed of only if the same goods are subject to inter-State levy of tax. He opined the use of words 'such goods' under section 15(b) of the Act is of significance. 18. We are totally unable to accept this line of reasoning. Once the entry is 'coke in all its forms' irrespective of the fact raw petroleum coke loses its original identity or in the process of manufacture calcined petroleum coke is produced, cannot take calcined petroleum coke out of the purview of this entry. In more or less identical situation, this court held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut the passages relied upon clearly show that hides and skins are termed "leather" even as soon as the process of tanning is over and the danger of their putrefaction is put an end to. The entry in the CST Act, however, includes within its scope hides and skins until they are "dressed". This, as we have seen, represents the stage when they undergo the process of finishing and assume a form in which they can be readily utilized for manufacture of various commercial articles. In this view, it is hardly material that coloured leather may be a form of leather or may even be said to represent a different commercial commodity. The statutory entry is comprehensive enough to include the products emerging from hides and skins until the process of dressing or finishing is done'." In our considered opinion, the decisions rendered in the cases, relied on by the petitioner, more particularly, the decision in Tata Tea Ltd. v. State of Assam [2015] 81 VST 442 (Gauhati) squarely cover the present case since facts and circumstances in both the cases are strikingly similar. Being so, we are of the opinion that clarification, rendered by the Commissioner of Taxes is uns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
