TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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 rules PVC pipes in pumping sets not eligible for tax exemption under Commercial Tax Act entry 89.</h1> <h3>Annapurna Industries Unit-II Versus Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Indore and another</h3> Annapurna Industries Unit-II Versus Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Indore and another - [2006] 143 STC 426 (MP) Issues:1. Interpretation of whether PVC pipes used in pumping sets can be considered as accessories of the pumping sets for exemption from sales tax under entry 89 of the Commercial Tax Act.2. Validity of imposition of interest by the assessing authority on the petitioner.Analysis:1. The primary issue in this case revolves around determining whether PVC pipes used in pumping sets, specifically those with 10 H.P. or less, can be classified as accessories of the pumping sets for the purpose of claiming exemption from sales tax under entry 89 of the Commercial Tax Act. The commercial tax authorities contended that PVC pipes do not qualify as accessories of the pumping sets, leading to the denial of exemption. The petitioner challenged this view, arguing for exemption. The court considered precedents and observed that the PVC pipes are essential parts of the pumping sets rather than spare parts or accessories. The court relied on past decisions, such as the Natural Gas Co. case, to support this interpretation. Ultimately, the court upheld the view of the commercial tax authorities, dismissing the petitions.2. The secondary issue raised by the petitioner pertains to the imposition of interest by the assessing authority. The petitioner argued against the levy of interest, while the State supported the imposition citing the provisions of section 27 of the Act. The court acknowledged the power of taxing authorities to impose interest for delayed tax payments as per the Act. It emphasized that the authority to levy interest must align with the statutory provisions, and if such power exists, the imposition of interest cannot be deemed unlawful. Consequently, the court sided with the State's argument, upholding the imposition of interest on the petitioner. In conclusion, the court found no merit in the writ petitions and dismissed them, declining to award costs to either party.
TaxTMI 