news round up - Taxmann
news round up - Taxmann
news round up - Taxmann
- TAGS
- news
- round
- taxmann
- taxmann.com
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
216 Goods & Services Tax Cases - Reports [Vol. 1<br />
trade circles is also required to be examined with reference to the instant<br />
case and examine whether they are understood in common parlance and<br />
in trade circles. Admittedly, the process carried out in extraction of<br />
oleoresin, the reminiscence that would follow are, cut chilly, crushed<br />
chilly and spent chilly and it is sold as a separate commodity and accepted<br />
both in trade and common parlance and it does not lose its identity by<br />
virtue of such extraction process. The originality of such commodity<br />
remains as such. Hence, in view of the same, we are of the view that the<br />
judgment of this Court in Habeeb Proteins would be squarely applicable<br />
to the facts of the present case.<br />
14. Yet another factor which requires to be considered in favour of the<br />
assessee is the subsequent amendment brought about to the Entry No. 89<br />
where under the Legislature in its wisdom has included crushed chilly, cut<br />
chilly and spent chilly by adding the same after the words “dry chillies”.<br />
Hence, we find that the Advance Ruling Authority was in error in holding<br />
that the residuary clause viz. section 4(1)(b) of the Act was applicable to the<br />
facts of this case viz. the commodity in question and the ruling that<br />
the assessee is liable to pay tax at 12.5 per cent for the period 1-4-2005 to<br />
31-3-2006.<br />
15. In view of our discussion made herein above, we hold that crushed<br />
chilly, spent chilly is a spice by itself which can be sold and traded in<br />
common parlance and accordingly, tax leviable would be at the rate of 4<br />
per cent and it comes within Entry No. 61 under the definition of “dry<br />
chillies” and accordingly, we answer the questions of law formulated<br />
herein above in favour of the assessee, against the revenue by holding that<br />
the Advance Ruling Authority was in error.<br />
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed without any order<br />
as to costs.<br />
■■<br />
GOODS & SERVICES TAX CASES ❑ JANUARY 20 - FEBRUARY 4, 2010 ◆ 92<br />
A<br />
B<br />
C<br />
D<br />
E<br />
F<br />
G