TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 687
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ribunal, Dharamshala, camp at Shimla, has erred in law in not appreciating that once good falls under any of Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) classification, the residuary entry is not applicable? (c) Whether the H.P. Tax Tribunal, Dharamshala, camp at Shimla has erred in law in not appreciating that the order passed by the Authorities regarding levy of penalty is totally against the basic principles of interpretation of provision of Act and law as the taxability is totally based on issue of interpretation." 3. Since all the aforesaid substantial questions of law are intrinsically inter-connected and inter related, therefore, they are taken up together for consideration and are being answered by a common reasoning. 4. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner is registered both under the Himachal Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short 'VAT Act') as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of manufacture of mechanical bodies, pre fab shelters, sheets / powder / chemicals /plyboard/hardware goods etc. 5. It was during routine checking, the ETO-cum-the Assessing Authority, Flying Squad (South Zone), Parwanoo (for short 'the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing Officer as affirmed upto the Tribunal is unjust and unlawful and the notice under Section 16 (8) of the VAT Act was illegal and incorrect and did not satisfy the criteria prescribed under Section 16 (8) which provides as under:- "16 (8) If a dealer has maintained false or incorrect accounts with a view to suppressing his sales, purchases or stocks of goods, or has concealed any particulars of his sales or his furnished to, or produced before, any Authority under this Act or the rules made there under any account, return or information which is false or incorrect in any material particular, the Commissioner or any person appointed to assist him under sub-Section (1) of Section 3 may, after affording such dealer a reasonable opportunity of being heard, direct him to pay by way of penalty in addition to the tax to which he is assessed or is liable to be assessed, an amount equal to twice the amount of tax to which he is assessed or is liable to be assessed." 11. Sh. Sood argued that the petitioner had not maintained any false accounts nor suppressed any material, more particularly, with regard to sales and purchases and had been filing his regular returns and had at n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....heil India Private Limited., Gurgaon during the years 2012-13 and 2013-14, had, as a matter of fact, found the petitioner to have sold smart tables, table top cubes, leaflet holders, spec card holders with print, glass counters with product base, experience counters, SIS black walls with translates, sign boards and display counters etc., to M/s Samsung India Ltd., Gurgaon, through their agent M/s Cheil India Pvt. Ltd. in which @5% was charged on the ground that the above goods were covered under entry No.60 pertaining to the IT products, of 'Part-II of Schedule 'A', notified under Section 6 (1) of the VAT Act. 19. Now, whether the goods fell within the said entry, would have to be essentially be determined from the entry 60 itself, which reads as under:- 60. IT products including computers, telephones (including mobile handsets, DVDs & CDs and parts thereof, tele-printers and wireless equipments and part thereof) and other products as notified vide notification No. EXN-F(5)-8/2005 dated 29.05.2009. "Telephone, cell phones, tele-printers, wireless equipment and part thereof, Digital Video Discs & Compact Discs and Information Technology products, that is to say:- Sr.N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot included in the list of the IT products on which VAT is chargeable @5%. 21. In this background, no fault can be found with the findings of the learned authorities below when they observe that these goods do not resemble the products listed in the above entry even remotely. The 'printed board on HDPE sheet' does not find mentioned in this tax slab as has been claimed by the petitioner. 22. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced before us the photographs and the description of the goods supplied by the petitioner to claim that these goods are high tech and have been manufactured on special order of M/s Samsung on the design supplied by it for performing specific functions. He would emphatically stress that the goods have sophisticated electrical and electronic circuits and are extremely expensive. Therefore, these goods should be deemed to be falling within entry No.60 and, therefore, taxable @5%. 23. We are not at all impressed by such argument, as the goods manufactured by the petitioner firstly do not find mention under entry No.60 of the above schedule and furthermore just because these tables has sophisticated electrical and electronic circuits and are extremely....