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 / RSS

2022 (1) TMI 308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion petitioner in these two revisions. M/s Tiptop Furniture, Kottakkal, Malappuram District/Dealer is the respondent. 3. The two revisions involve similar questions of fact and law; hence are disposed of by this common order. The circumstances and the orders leading to the filing of the present revisions are stated in the following table. Sl. No. Assessment year Order of Primary Authority Order of Appellate Authority Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal O.T.Revision in High Court 1 2013-14 Order No.32101087307/ 2013-14 dated 26.08.2015 Order dated 7.9.2016 in KVATA-2062/16 TA( VAT) No.414 of 2016 O.T.Rev.136 of 2017 2 2013-14 Order No.ML- 2992/14 (in OR 78/2013/14) dated 16.11.2015 Ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ce of the Revenue. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have made submissions both for and against the order of the Tribunal, in addition have attempted to pursuade this Court to take an independent view on the rate of tax applicable to the furniture sold by the dealer whether is 5% or 13.5%. After appreciating the rival contentions, we are of the view that examining or re-examining classification of goods now subjected to 5% tax would virtually amount to examining and re-examining the circumstances stated by the dealer. The totality of circumstances does not warrant such an exercise by this Court. The legal objection raised by the learned Sr.Government Pleader is that Entry 54 of 3rd Schedule reads as follows: "54. Hand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....indicate the subheading and the eight digit numbers indicate the specific commodity number. While interpreting the commodities in the Schedules, the following guidelines may be followed. I. The commodities which are given four digit HSN Number shall include all those commodities coming under that heading of the HSN. II. The commodities which are given six digit HSN Number shall include all those commodities coming under that sub-heading of the HSN. III. The commodities which are given eight digit HSN Number shall mean that commodity which bears that HSN Number. IV. As an exception to the above rules, there are certain entries in the Schedules, which bear the eight digit numbers but the four digit heading ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edules under KVAT Act, the finding recorded by the Tribunal is illegal and erroneous. He prays for setting aside the orders under revision and remit the matter to the Tribunal for consideration and disposal afresh. 9. Mr.Harisankar Menon contends that the dealer claimed tax at 5% on the furniture sold which could be classified as wood marequetry and inlaid wood, caskets and cases for jewellery or cutlery. The articles for which concessional rate of tax is claimed by the dealer, are in the nature of sophas, cots etc. where the work of marequetry is involved. The issue whether it constitutes handicraft or not is considered by the CESTAT at the instance of the sister concern and the case of the sister of dealer was accepted. The finding rec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....minator and definitely must be referred to by all the authorities under the Act while deciding a dispute relating to schedules under the Act. In the case on hand the said omission is glaring and goes to the root of the findings recorded by the Tribunal. 12. In the case on hand the Tribunal, without referring to the Rules of Interpretation of Schedules under KVAT Act, has independently considered and recorded a finding in favour of the dealer that the dealer is entitled to rate of tax at 5% on the furniture sold under the head 'woodmarquetry'. The judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above has taken note of an omission on the part of this Court while disposing of a matter, where the Rules of Interpretation ought to have been ....