TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 676
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sence of the High Court verdict that Mosquito Mat and Coils are repellent (it repulses mosquitoes) and not insecticides (it kills mosquitoes) and the two commodities represent two different kinds of goods. 02. The facts of the case reveal that an assessment order was passed against the applicant / Company - M/s Reckitt Benckiser Limited on 22.01.2008, against which, an appeal was preferred before the Deputy Commissioner, Indore and the assessment order was affirmed by the Deputy Commissioner, against which, an appeal was preferred before the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Appellate Board and the same has also been dismissed. 03. The facts further reveal that the applicant / Company is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of various household items like harpic, soap, medicines, mosquito repellent, insecticides, shaving cream etc. and was aggrieved by the action of the department including mosquito repellent under the entry under Schedule II of the Madhya Pradesh Entry Tax Act, 1976 within the meaning of Section 3 (1) b of the Act of 1976. Thus in short, the whole controversy was whether mosquito repellent is insecticide or not. The charging section under the Madhya Pradesh ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcle, Madras and Ors. 1990 STC 436 the Madras High Court considered whether Mosquito; Mats marketed under brand name "Good knight" could be treated as 'insecticides' and consequently fall under Item No. 66 of the Scheduled to the Act. It is in this context that High Court observed:- 5. On going through the decision of the Tribunal, 1 am in entire agreement with the line of reasoning adopted therein. Even that apart, the entry No. 66 of the First Schedule to the Act while describing the various commodities as falling within it refers to insecticides generally and not with or of any particular percentage of combination or composition. As a matter of fact, the concluding portion of the entry " and combinations thereof' without prescribing any particular percentage is an indicator that what was envisaged therein is that the product may he an insecticide simpliciter or a combination of an insecticide to bring it within the meaning of the entry and it need not necessarily he of any particular percentage of combination of any one or more of the category of goods referred to in the entry. The stand taken to the contra for the Revenue is wholly misconceived.... 22. It may be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ically classified order entry 123 B from April 1, 1991 under item 85 from April 1, J992 making it a single point rate. 24. A learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Commissioner Trade Tax v. Priya Distributor Trade Tax Revision No. 334 of 1996 connected with Trade Tax Revision No. 338 of 1996, The Commissioner of Trade Tax U.P. v. Priya Distributor, Ghaziabad considered whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that Mosquito Mats fall under the category of 'insecticides'. The Court placed reliance upon the decision of the Madras High Court and Orissa High Court in the case of Transelektra Domestic Products (supra) and Sonic Electrochem (supra) respectively arid held that Tribunal was justified in holding that Mosquito Mats fall under category 'insecticides' and liable to tax accordingly. Special Leave Petitions No. 13187 of 2003 and 17018 of 2003 against the aforesaid decisions dated 20-2-2003 in TTR No. 334 of 1996 and in TTR No. 338 of 1996 were filed. Both the SLPs were dismissed on 23.2.2004 and the order passed by Supreme Court is quoted below- We see no reason to interfere. The special leave petitions are dismissed. However, in Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the decisions referred to above leave us in no doubt that the products sold by the petitioners are basically in the categories of 'insecticides' particularly in the absence of any indication in the Notification in question. 27. It has, however, been urged by Sri Kesarwani, learned Counsel for the Revenue that the petitioner applied for registration under Section 8A of the Act ''Form 14" wherein in column 7 it has been mentioned that the commodity traded is "Mosquito Repellent Mats/Coils etc.". Similarly under Section 7 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the petitioner applied for registration in Form-A wherein in column 16 it has been mentioned that the purchase and sales of "Mosquito Repellent Mats/Goils etc". 28. We are, however, unable to persuade ourselves to hold that merely because the petitioners have at various stages contended that the product is described or commonly traded as 'Mosquito Repellant' it should not fall in the category of insecticides'. We would have accepted such a contention if there was separate or specific exclusion entry of Mosquito Repellant in the existing entry of 'Pesticide & Insecticide'. In that case there....