1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court clarifies tax exemption for waste paper used in manufacturing paper, emphasizing legislative intent and practical application.</h1> The Court allowed both revision petitions, setting aside the tax assessment orders. It emphasized practical application of laws, legislative intent behind ... - Issues:- Exemption from payment of entry tax under entry 16-B for waste paper used as raw material.- Interpretation of the term 'paper' in Explanation II of entry 16-B.- Justification of assessing authority's tax assessment on waste paper sold for manufacturing paper.Analysis:The petitioners, engaged in the business of waste paper, were subjected to entry tax under the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979. The petitioners claimed exemption under entry 16-B for waste paper used in manufacturing paper. The Tribunal held that the exemption did not apply to waste paper as per Explanation II, which specified exemption for 'paper' but not 'waste paper.' The petitioner argued that 'paper' should include waste paper if used as raw material, emphasizing practical usage over theoretical distinctions. The Court noted that legislative intent should be upheld without adopting a hyper-technical approach. The purpose of the enactment and the practical interpretation of the law were crucial. The Court found no justification for subjecting the petitioners to tax on waste paper sold for manufacturing paper, as the distinction between waste paper and paper was not clearly intended by the Legislature. Therefore, the appellate authorities erred in dismissing the appeals, leading to the setting aside of the tax assessment orders.In conclusion, the Court allowed both revision petitions, setting aside the orders of the assessing authority and the appellate authorities. The judgment emphasized the practical application of laws, the legislative intent behind exemptions, and the need to interpret statutes in a manner that aligns with the purpose of the enactment. The decision clarified that waste paper used as raw material for manufacturing paper should be considered under the exemption for 'paper,' highlighting the importance of understanding legal provisions in their practical context.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
