TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (11) TMI 551
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant-assessee has claimed that following substantial question of law would arise for determination of this court: Whether HDPE/PP fabrics are covered by entry "textile fabrics" given in entry 52 of Schedule A appended to the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (as applicable to the Union Territory, Chandigarh) and, therefore, exempt from payment of tax in the Union Territory of Chandigarh? Facts are not in dispute. The appellant-assessee is a dealer registered under the provisions of the VAT Act. It deals in the sale of high density poly ethylene/propylene (for brevity, "HDPE/PP") poly fabrics. The appellant-assessee was registered as a dealer even before the VAT Act was applied to the Union Territory of Chandigarh, under th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pute was covered by entry 58 of Schedule "B", which is further dealt in "list of industrial inputs and packing materials". The list has mentioned HDPE, at serial No. 162, as "packing material item attracting VAT at four per cent". The view of the Tribunal is discernible from the concluding para, which reads as under: "We have gone through Chapter 39 of the Central Excise Act and also the list containing goods listed under various headings appended to item No. 58 of Schedule B of the VAT Act, 2005. These do not tally with each other. There is no entry in the list of headings of VAT Act, 2005 with No. 3926 whereas there is an entry No. 3926.90 in the list of goods appended to the Central Excise Act. The contention of the learned counsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....containing goods taxable at the rate of four per cent. The order of the Commissioner is thus modified to the extent that tax at the rate of four per cent is leviable upon the goods in question and not at the rate of 12.5 per cent. The appeal is decided in these terms." Mr. K.L. Goyal, learned counsel for the assessee-appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has committed grave error in law because HDPE may be covered by entry 58 read with List item No. 162 of Schedule "B" but the product like fabrics made from HDPE would not be covered. According to learned counsel, the HDPE in its granular form is different than by-product like fiber and polythene. Learned counsel has emphasised that the assessee-appellant uses HDPE for the purposes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es Tax [1986] 61 STC 318; AIR 1986 SC 626. We have gone through the paper book and various orders passed by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner and that of the Tribunal and have also reflected on the submissions made by learned counsel. It would be necessary to first glance through the relevant entries of Schedules "A" and "B" along with lists, relevant portion of which are extracted as under: "SCHEDULE-A (See section 16) List of tax free goods Serial No. Name of Commodity 1 to 51 . . . 52. Textile fabric including terry towels 53 to 57 . . . . SCHEDULE-B (See section 8) List of goods taxable at four per cent Serial No. Name of Commodity 1 to 57 . . . 58. Industrial inputs and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has been correctly concluded by the Tribunal that the goods in question are not covered by entry 52 of Schedule A as by any stretch of imagination it cannot be concluded that it is textile fabrics including terry towels. In fact, Mr. K.L. Goyal, learned counsel for the assessee-appellant has shown the goods to us in the court, which were thick polythene sheet and after stitching, it could be converted to a polythene bag. By examining the goods as it would be understood in popular sense, we were not left with any doubt that those items would not be covered by entry 52, which covers textile fabrics including terry towels. The argument raised by Mr. Goyal, learned counsel for the assesseeappellant based on the judgments in the cases of Poly....