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

2019 (5) TMI 121

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....012 and onwards. 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of pre-painted corrugated iron and steel sheets. The petitioner firm submitted an application under Section 59(4) of the KVAT Act seeking clarification regarding the rate of tax applicable to painted corrugated iron and steel sheets. Considering the same, the clarification impugned herein has been issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 3. The learned counsel Sri Vivek A.R. appearing for the petitioner referring to Section 14(iv) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ('CST Act, 1956' for short) submits that pre-painted steel metal sheets squarely comes within the ambit of the said Section as "declared goods". The Commissioner of Commercia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issued pursuant to the order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under Section 59(4) of the KVAT Act, 2003 in the case of the present petitioner - M/s. SLN Roofing & Construction. 8. In the said proceedings, the cognate bench of this Court in paragraph No.5 has observed thus:- "5. From a bare perusal of the order passed by the Respondent-Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under Section 59(4) of the KVAT Act, 2003, it is clear that the said Commissioner has not considered the effect of Section 14(vi) of the CST Act, 1956 at all and therefore, whether the commodity dealt with by the petitioner would fall under clause (vi) or not, was not an issue before the Respondent-Commissioner of Commercial Taxes." 9. In the said c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....contrary to the principal clause: (2) it must neither increase nor diminish it: (3) but where the principal clause is general in terms it may restrict it: see this explained with many examples, Stukeloy v. Butler Hob. 171"; The quotation, given above, from Stroud's Judicial Dictionary shows that, ordinarily, the expression "that is to say" is employed to make clear and fix the meaning of what is to be explained or defined. Such words are not used, as a rule, to amplify a meaning while removing a possible doubt for which purpose the word "includes" is generally employed. In unusual cases, depending upon the context of the words "that is to say", this expression may be followed by illustrative in stances. In Megh Ra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e categories falling under:   "Iron and Steel" constitutes a new species of commercial commodity more clearly new. 13. It is not in dispute that Galvanized Steel Metal Sheets comes within the ambit of clause (vi) of Section 14(iv). Now the question would be whether Pre-painted Galvanized Steel Metal Sheets would come within the ambit of the said entry or not. Pre-painted Galvanized Steel Metal Sheets are construed to be a different commodity other than Galvanized Steel Metal Sheets by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes based on the commercial and common parlance theory, but the same is not substantiated except holding that Pre-painted Galvanized Steel Metal Sheets are ready to use than just Galvanized Steel Metal Sheets. ....