Burden of proof for concessional tax rate on cables failed where evidence did not support industrial cable classification.

The dealer bore the burden of proving entitlement to the concessional tax rate under the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The dispute turned on whether cables used in a work contract qualified as industrial cable taxable at 4% rather than cable taxable at 12.5%. The dealer relied mainly on a chartered engineer's certificate, but did not show that the manufacturer treated the goods as industrial cable or that the materials matched the relevant concessional entries. On the evidence, the lower rate was not established and tax at 12.5% applied.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant established entitlement to tax the cables at 4% as industrial cable instead of 12.5% as cable under the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

Analysis: Section 14 places the burden on the dealer to prove entitlement to the lower rate of tax. The dispute was confined to the applicable rate on the cables used in the work contract. The appellant relied mainly on a chartered engineer's certificate, but it was not shown that the manufacturer itself treated the goods as industrial cable or that the materials used satisfied the relevant entry for industrial cables, high voltage cables, XLPE cables, jelly filled cables, or optical fibres. On the evidence, the appellant failed to discharge the burden of proving that the goods fell within the concessional entry.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to taxation at 4% and was liable to pay tax at 12.5%; the finding was against the appellant and in favour of the Revenue.

---