V.K. ENTERPRISES Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
SALES TAX TRIBUNAL
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
M.Ramakrishna, Chairman -
(1.) THIS is an appeal filed against the orders passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Vijayawada in Appeal No. VJA.I/145/96 -97, Dated 13.11.1996 whereby the appeal preferred against the orders passed by the Dy. Commercial Tax Officer, Kothapeta, Vijayawada in Asst. No. 12389/94 -95, Dated 2.9.1996 disputing the levy of tax of Rs. 2,403/ - on a turnover of Rs. 1,09,200/ - was dismissed. The appellant is M/s. V.K. Enterprises, Vijayawada. In this appeal the issue involved is whether Camphor and Patcha Karpuram are one and the same and fall under Entry 122 of the First Schedule to the APGST Act as held by the local authorities or not?
Reiterating the contentions urged before the lower authorities, it is contended by the learned authorised representative that there was no justification at all for treating both the camphor and patcha karpuram as one and the same which fall under Item 122 of the First Schedule. Patcha Karpuram (Iso Borneal) does not fall under Item 122 of First Schedule because Item 122 of First Schedule says that Camphor only where as Camphor garlands and stocks will fall under Seventh Schedule by Act 22 of 1995. The usage of the commodity will decide the levy of tax. Patcha Karpuram is used in the preparation of Sweets, Supari and eatable items, whereas Camphor is used as drug and also for harathi while pooja is performed. The learned authorised representative has relied upon the decision reported in : 16 STC 935 which will prevail as prior to introduction of Item No. 122.
(2.) ON the other hand, the learned State Representative has relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities. The points for consideration are (i) whereas Patcha Karpuram, which is the subject matter of this appeal is one and the same commodity like Camphor and whether they fall under Item 122 of the First Schedule to the APGST Act. (ii) If not whether the impugned orders are liable to be set -aside?
(3.) POINT No. 1: - -It is to be noted that Camphor was introduced from 1.3.1974 as an Item No. 122. In the decision reported in : (1965) 16 STC 935, Their Lordships of the Calcutta High Court in Sri Om Prakash v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Others, while considering the question about the assessee who purchased camphor in powder form, converted it into Camphor cubes and sold such cubes in the market under different brand names. The Revenue assessed the sales turnover to tax under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act. Whereas the assessee contended that Camphor was not a notified commodity under Sec. (4) of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954. Under the said Act, the word "drug" as defined in clause (b) in Sec. 3 of Drugs Act was notified as a commodity liable to taxation. According to the definition of the term "drug" in Sec. 3(b) of the Drugs Act, 1940, read with British Pharmaceutical Code, it is beyond dispute that Camphor is a drug. Therefore, their Lordships held that Camphor is a drug and falls within the scope of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954.
It is to be noted that Camphor is also used in burning for devotional purposes.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.