Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee's goods, namely biological and scientific instruments and apparatus, fell within the exemption under Notification No. KA.NI.-2-1166/XI-9 (231)/94 U.P. Act 15/48-Order-2000 dated 10.04.2000, and whether the Tribunal was justified in treating them as unclassified goods and denying the benefit of exemption.
Analysis: The entry in the later notification covered scientific instruments and biology instruments and apparatus, and unlike the earlier notification dated 20.05.1976, it did not confine the benefit to instruments used by students. The words used in the notification were to be given their plain meaning, and the distinction drawn by the Tribunal between "biology instruments" and "biological instruments" was held to be artificial. The expression "student" was understood broadly to include persons engaged in research and higher study, and the beneficial object of the exemption was to advance learning and research. The assessee's earlier treatment of the goods as taxable did not defeat the statutory benefit, since there can be no estoppel against law.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to exemption under Notification No. KA.NI.-2-1166/XI-9 (231)/94 U.P. Act 15/48-Order-2000, and the finding that the goods were liable to tax as unclassified goods was set aside.