TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 805
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 06.04.2006 issued by the Government of Karnataka?' (B) Whether the Tribunal and the authorities below were justified in interpreting the relevant entry-5 in the notification dated 06.04.2006, overlooking the Rules for interpretation of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short "the Tariff Act") read with the explanatory notes therein, and rejecting the petitioner's claim that VSATs are covered by Entry 53 of the third schedule of the Act. (C) Whether there is sufficient material on record to hold that the entire turnover of the Petitioner was through sale of VSATs and whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in not interfering with the order of the Assessing Authority?' 4. Shri K.P. Kumar, learned senior advocate for the petitioners, fairly submitted that the case of the petitioners is not covered by the Notification No.FD 116 CSL 2006 (9) dated 31.03.2006 under Sl.No.12 bearing Heading No.8529.10 under the description "Aerials, Antennas and parts; parts of goods specified in sub-headings 8525.10, 8525.20 and 8527.90, and therefore, the question raised in the memorandum of revisions, based on this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he contentions urged by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the case of the petitioner, is covered by Entry 53 of the third Schedule of the Act r/w Section 4(1)(a)(ii) thereof, in the light of the Notification dated 06.04.2006 and that the item 5 in the table as reflected in the notification had not been interpreted by the Tribunal as provided for by the Rules for interpretation of the Tariff Act read with explanatory notes therein. It would be advantageous to reproduce the Notification dated 06.04.2006 so as to appreciate the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner as well as the respondent. The Notification dated 06.04.2006 reads thus:- "NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 4 read with entry 53 of the Third Schedule to the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (Karnataka Act 32 of 2004), the Government of Karnataka hereby specifies with immediate effect, the goods specified in column (3) of the table below with heading and sub-heading numbers under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (Central Act 5 of 1986), specified in corresponding entries in column (1) and (2), as IT (Informa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; (4) Where the description against any heading or sub-heading is shown as "other" then the interpretation as provided in Explanation 2 shall apply. By Order and in the name of Governor of Karnataka" 10. In the instant revision petitions, we are concerned with Item-5 in the Notification dated 06.04.2006. Item-5 makes reference to sub-heading 8525.20 in the Tariff Act i.e., transmission apparatus incorporating reception apparatus. The Explanation 1 in the Notification clearly provides that the Rules for interpretation of the First-schedule-Excise Tariff to the Tariff Act read with explanatory notes as updated from time to time by the Customs, Co-operation Council, Brussels would apply for the interpretation of the entries in this Notification (06.04.2006). The notification further provides that where any commodities are described against any heading or, as the case may be, sub-heading, and the aforesaid description is different in any manner from the corresponding description in the Tariff Act, then only, those commodities described as aforesaid will be covered by the scope of the notification and other commodities though covered by cor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ticle described in sub-heading 8525 20. 14. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that this contention was not raised either before the first appellate authority or before the Tribunal and therefore, the Tribunal had no occasion to examine the case of the petitioners, in the light of the Heading 8525 read with sub-heading 8525.20 and tariff item 8525.20.91 and the Rules for interpretation of the first schedule-excise tariff. He also submitted that the commodity involved in the present petition is not covered either by the first notification dated 31-3-2006 or the said notification dated 6-4-2006. 15. Having considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and so also the fact that the entries in the Notification and the Central Excise Tariff were not examined by the Tribunal in the light of the rules for interpretation of the first schedule-excise tariff, we are inclined to set-aside the order of the Tribunal in the present revision petition without expressing any opinion on merits of the case with direction to the Tribunal to consider the appeal afresh in the light of the observations made in this order. Hence we pass the f....