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

2006 (10) TMI 397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... per cent coming under serial number 3(8) of SRO No. 82 of 2006. The appellant is importing and distributing Sticko brand super glue, which, according to the appellant, is manufactured from organic chemicals and is mostly used as industrial input particularly in the automobile industry. The appellant has been collecting 12.5 per cent till July 2005 when they have obtained certificate from the Cochin University of Science and Technology stating that the Sticko brand super glue marketed by the appellant is methyl cyano acrylate which is an ester of unsaturated acyclic monoacid which comes under HSN Code 2916.19.50. The appellant then sent a letter dated July 19, 2005 to the Sales Tax Officer stating that the super glue sticko brand markete....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 6 vide Amendment Act 39 of 2005 was notified by the Government in the gazette only with effect from January 28, 2006. Learned Government Pleader Sri Georgekutty Mathew on the other hand contended that even before the issuance of the notification dated January 28, 2006, the appellant was bound to pay tax at 12.5 per cent since unamended clause (d) had stated that in the case of goods not falling under clauses (a), (b) or (c) the rate of tax payable was 12.5 per cent at all points of sale of such goods within the State. Counsel submitted that super glue product of the appellant did not fall under item 164(10) of the Third Schedule, that is why the appellant had collected tax at the rate of 12.5 per cent. Placing reliance on the decision ....