ROOTS MULTICLEAN LIMITED Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER, ULTADANGA CHARGE AND OTHERS
LAWS(ST)-2011-6-1
SALES TAX TRIBUNAL
Decided on June 28,2011

Roots Multiclean Limited Appellant
VERSUS
Sales Tax Officer, Ultadanga Charge And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) IN this instant application under section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, the questions arising for consideration are, whether the items sold by the petitioner, namely, vacuum cleaners, sweeping machines, scrubber driers, lawn mowers, high pressure jet cleaners, ride -on sweeping and scrubbing machines fall under the residuary entry in Schedule CA of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 as claimed by the Revenue or under item (xxviii) of the entry at serial No. 54B of Part I of Schedule C of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short, "the VAT Act") as claimed by the petitioner and whether the Revenue was justified in determining the interest and issue of demand notice thereafter on the disputed amount of unpaid tax in terms of the provisions of section 33 of the VAT Act. The petitioner is a reseller of various items like vacuum cleaners, sweeping machines, scrubber drivers, lawn mowers, high pressure jet cleaners, ride -on sweeping and scrubbing machines, etc. (hereinafter referred as, "disputed items") by procuring such goods from outside West Bengal by way of stock transfer. In the assessment of the petitioner for the period fourth quarter ending March 31, 2006, the Sales Tax Officer, Ultadanga charge (respondent No. 1), charged the disputed items to tax at 12.5 percent treating the items to be covered as a residuary entry as per Schedule CA of the VAT Act. The petitioner while filing quarterly returns paid tax at four percent on sales of those "disputed items".
(2.) Pursuant to the assessment made on August 29, 2008, respondent No. 1 issued a demand notice for Rs. 14,06,706. This demand comprised of assessed difference of tax of Rs. 10,74,744, together with a penalty amount of Rs. 2,000 and interest of Rs. 3,29,963 payable under section 33 of the VAT Act. Aggrieved by the assessment of respondent No. 1 dated August 29, 2008, the petitioner has come up before the Tribunal with this application.
(3.) SRI Jaweid Ahmed Khan, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the disputed items fall very much within the meaning of entry 54 -B in Part I of Schedule C to the VAT Act being items of plant and machinery. The disputed items are covered by item (xxviii) of that entry, and are exigible to tax at four percent. But while making assessment for the period fourth quarter ending March 31, 2006, respondent No. 1 has observed that the disputed items not being specified in Schedules A, B, C or D of the VAT Act, are exigible to tax at 12.5 percent.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.