Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1995 (9) TMI 369

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... tax case appeal by the assessee against the suo motu revisional order of the Joint Commissioner under section 34 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 holding that the assessee's turnover to the extent of Rs. 3,96,630.83 relating to "nylon zip" would have to be taxed only under entry 145 of the First Schedule read with section 3(2) of the Act and not under multi-point levy pursuant sectio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Kerala reported in [1991] 81 STC 351 (Ker) where it has been observed that though nylon and plastic articles are having the same source materials, the articles of nylon are understood in the popular sense differently from the articles of plastic. The relevant observation at page 356 is as follows: "Though a scientific analysis of plastics and nylon reveals that both have a petro-chemical bas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e and nylon yarn is distinct and separate even if the source material is the same, this Court referred to [1991] 81 STC 351 (Ker) [Importex International (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala] thus: "In Importex International (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [1991] 81 STC 351, the Kerala High Court had to deal with an identical question. In that case the petitioners were dealers in nylon fishnets. In that case....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....above proposition that nylon article is different from plastic article, adopting the common parlance theory could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the Revenue also. In fact she fairly pointed out our own earlier judgment dated July 10, 1995* in T.C. No. 69 of 1989 dealing with the question relating to glass bottles and glass wares. There also we reiterated the same principles as laid dow....