TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether aluminium foil falls within the expression "sheets" in entry 13 of the relevant notification and is therefore taxable as a non-ferrous industrial product, and whether the revisional authority could disturb the Assessing Authority's consistent view treating aluminium foil as aluminium sheet.
Analysis: Entry 13 covered non-ferrous industrial products including ingots, bars, slabs, sheets, circles, strips, rods, wires, tubes, angles and scrap. Aluminium is a non-ferrous metal, and foil made of aluminium was held to be nothing more than a very thin sheet. The Court accepted the dictionary meaning of "foil" and the view that printing or lacquering did not alter its essential character. It further held that the Assessing Authority had consistently treated aluminium foil as aluminium sheet, those assessments had attained finality, and a revisional authority could not upset that factual determination merely because another view was possible.
Conclusion: Aluminium foil was held to be covered by "sheets" under the notification, and the revisional interference was held to be unwarranted. The question of law was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a commodity is understood in common parlance as a thin sheet and the original assessment has consistently adopted that classification, revisional interference is not justified merely because an alternative view is possible.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
