Consistent commodity classification under VAT law bars arbitrary higher tax treatment without distinguishing material.

Toffee and candy were treated as falling under Entry No. 137 of Schedule II Part A of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 because their classification depended on the commodity's nature, sugar content, and manufacturing process, all of which supported the finding that the goods were toffee. Consistent treatment of the same or similar commodity in the tax regime was also relevant; applying a different and harsher rate to another dealer without distinguishing material would be arbitrary and unsustainable. On that reasoning, the assessee's classification was upheld and the revenue's revision failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether toffee and candy manufactured and sold by the dealer were classifiable under Entry No. 137 of Schedule II Part A of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, or under Schedule V at the higher rate.

Analysis: The product classification turned on the nature of the commodity, the sugar content, and the manufacturing process. The Tribunal had already examined these factors and found the goods to be toffee. The revenue had also adopted a lesser tax rate for the same or similar commodity in the case of other dealers. A different view for the present dealer would create uncertainty and arbitrariness in the tax regime, which was impermissible.

Conclusion: The commodity was correctly treated as falling under Entry No. 137 of Schedule II Part A, and the revenue's revision failed.

Final Conclusion: The assessee's classification was upheld and the revision was dismissed on the same reasoning applied to the connected matter.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the same commodity is treated consistently in the tax regime, a different and harsher classification for another dealer without distinguishing material is arbitrary and unsustainable.

---