2020 (5) TMI 530

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of the case, the M.P. Commercial Tax Appellate Board was right in law in holding tht the assessing authority had jurisdiction and power u/s 9 (2) of Central Tax Act, 1956 read with section 19 (1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and review and revise his own order of assessment on a change of opinion of the interpretation of the Notification No.A-5-1-94/ST-V (55) dated 30.03.1994 and pass a reassessment order under the Central Sales Tax, 1956 ? Question No.2 Whether, the Appellate Board was right in law in holding that the exemption from payment of tax granted on "all kinds of footwear made of PVC and chappals made of rubber and straps there of the sale price of which did not exceed Rs. 50/- per pair" under Notification dated 30.03.1994 issued u/s 12 of M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 was not general to a class of goods and therefore, the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of exemption from payment of tax under Sec. 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?" 03. The facts of the case reveal that the assessee in the present case is a manufacturer of footwear and an assessment order was passed on 06.02.1998. The assessee has availed the benefit ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 175, Manish Plastics v/s Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Karnataka & Another dated 24.02.1995 (W.P. No.16446/1991), Royal PVC Shoes Private Limited v/s The State of Rajasthan & Another dated 17.01.2002 (Civil Special Appeal No.1152/2000), Commissioner of Sales Tax, J & K & Others v/s Pine Chemicals Limited v/s Others reported in (1995) 1 SCC 58 and Sivanesan Company v/s Commercial Tax Officer, Purasawalkam Assst. Circle, Chenni reported in 2010 SCC OnLine Mad 6406. 09. In the case of Nayan Sukh (supra), this Court in paragraph - 10 has held as under:- "10. In the back ground of the law declared by the Supreme Court as also the Judgment of Karnataka High Court in Manish Plastics Case (supra) I find that the goods in question cannot be said to have been exempted from payment State Sales Tax generally as the exemption have been granted under specified condition. Exemption is limited to the spectacles and other items valued at Rs. 50/- only. Therefore, in my opinion, the exemption is operative under specified condition. Further, I find that for attracting the provisions of Sec. 8(2-A) of the Central Act, the goods generally exempted from payment of the State S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....power under section 42(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, clarified that cast iron castings were covered within the term cast iron including ingot moulds, occurring in item 2 of the Third Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. Section 42 of the Andhra Act empowered the Government to remove difficulties in giving effect to the provisions of the said Act. Reliance upon the clarification issued by the Government was placed by the petitioner/assessee in the said case in support of its claim that case iron castings were included in cast iron. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court however repelled this argument holding that clarifications/circulars issued by the Central Government or a State Government simply represented their understanding of the statutory provisions, and that any such circulars or clarifications were not binding upon the courts nor was there any estoppel against law. Their Lordships observed thus : "So far as clarifications/circulars issued by the Central Government and/or State Government are concerned, they represent merely their understanding of the statutory provisions. They are not binding upon the courts. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ter-State turnover of such class of shoes is also exempt Under Section 8(2-A) of the CST Act. It is not in dispute before us that turnover in respect of which exemption under Section 8(2-A) is claimed, is related to such footwears which are not made of leather and whose value is only upto Rs. 100/-. Therefore, such inter-State turnover is entitled to claim such exemption and no tax under CST is liable to be imposed. 39. Reference to a decision of Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal in M/s. Ajay Polymers (P.) Ltd. (supra) has been made in Assessment Order. Said judgment relates to period during which Notification dt. 7.11.88 was in force. The notification which was in force for the period in question was not before the Tribunal. I fact it does not refer to any other judgment than the II Pine Chemical's case, without referring to contents of Notification. The decision in M/s. Ajay Polymers (P) Ltd. has no relevance in considering the notification dt. 7.3.94. As noticed by us, the question whether any goods, or class of goods or a category of goods are exempt from tax or subjected to lower rate of tax generally or such exemption or concession in rate is subject to certain specifi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ral exemption and is not to be read as conditioned by specific circumstances." 10. In the circumstances, applying the abovesaid decision of the apex court to the facts of the case herein, I hold that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of exemption in respect of seized transactions having regard to the Explanation appended to section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs." 14. This Court has carefully gone through the aforesaid judgments. The notification in the present case exempting all kind of footwear made of PVC, chappals made of rubber and straps there of the sale price of which does not exceed Rs. 50/- per pair, can never said to be a general exemption, as it is conditioned by specified circumstances. 15. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Appellate Board was justified in holding that the exemption granted from payment of tax is not a general exemption and the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of exemption from payment of tax under Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The questions of law are accordingly, answered in affirma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....धिनियम, 1956 (क्रमांक 74 सन 1956) की धारा 14 के खण्ड (एक) में यथा विनिदिष्ट चाम्य. (दो) इस प्रविष्टि के अनुक्रमांक (एक) में वर्णित से भित्र खाद्य त्रि तथा धान्य. 2 (एक) केन्द्रीय विक्रयकर अधिनियम 1956 (क्रमांक 74 सन 1956) की धारा 14 के खण्ड (छः- ए) में यथा विनिदिष्ट à....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....¤¬à¤¹à¤¾à¤°à¥€ झाडूं. 13 पी. व्ही. सी. के बने सभी प्रकार के पदत्राण (फुटवियर) एवं रबर की बनी चप्पल तथा 50रू. प्रति जोड़े से अधिक न हो। उनके स्ट्रेप्स जिनका विक्रय मूल्य मध्यप्रदेश शासन, वाणिज्यिकर विभाग क्रमांक ए5-1/94/विक - पॉच ( 53 ) भोपाल दिनांक 30-3-94 अधिसà¥....