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 the expression "fish" in Item No. 7 of the Schedule to the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940 includes prawns and shrimps, making them liable to cess.
Analysis: The prior decision relied on by the Court had already held that fish and prawns/shrimps are distinct commodities in biological, commercial, and common parlance understanding. The Court applied the same interpretation to the scheduled entry and treated the dispute as one of legal construction of the entry rather than a pure question of fact. On that basis, prawns and shrimps could not be brought within the expression "fish" in the schedule.
Conclusion: The expression "fish" does not include prawns and shrimps, and the levy of cess was not sustainable. The issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
