Amendments made by Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy, Amendment and Validation) Act, 2009 (Mah Act No. XVII of 2009) in MVAT ACT

On 29^th June 2009 the Government of Maharashtra passed the Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy, Amendment and Validation) Act, 2009 (Mah Act No. XVII of 2009) and amended the Maharashtra Value Added Tax. These amendments are brought into effect from 1^st July 2009 unless otherwise specified. Following are the amendments which are made in the MVAT Act.

1) Amendment of section 20:

(i)This section refers to returns. Sub-section 4 makes the provision regarding revised return. This Sub-section is amended and now it reads as follows.

“(4) Any person or dealer who, having furnished a return or, as the case may be, a revised return,-

(a) discovers any omission or incorrect statement therein, may furnish, a revised return in respect of the period covered by the return at any time before a notice for assessment is served on him in respect of the period covered by the said return or before the expiry of a period of nine months from the end of the year to which the return or, as the case may be, the revised return relates, whichever is earlier;

(b) discovers as a result of the report of audit of his accounts prepared for the purpose of section 61, any omission or incorrect statement therein, may furnish a revised return as regards the period in respect of which the omission or incorrect statement is discovered, after the expiry of the period of thirty days from the date prescribed for furnishing the said report;

(c) agrees with the observation contained in any intimation received by him under section 63, that the return, fresh return or, as the case may be, revised return, filed by him contains any omission or incorrect statement, may furnish a revised return in respect of the period covered by the said return within thirty days from the date of service on him of the said intimation”

(ii) Now this sub-section contains 3 clauses namely clause (a), clause (b) and clause (c). Clause (a) is more or less the earlier sub-section 4 which makes provision for filing of revised return with in the period of nine months from the end of year to which it relates,  clause (b) and (c) however contain the new provisions inserted for the first time.

(iii) Clause (b) states that, if as a result of report of audit of accounts prepared for the purpose of section 61, a dealer discovers any omission, or incorrect statement therein then he may furnish a revised return as regards the period in respect of which the omission or incorrect statement is discovered.

Normally a dealer files the returns for a particular period and there after the audit report is prepared by the auditor as required under section 61 of the MVAT Act. In some cases the mistakes or omissions which are unnoticed by the dealer are brought to his notice because of this report and accordingly the auditor advices the dealer to file a revised return.

If the same is acceptable to the dealer, then he may file a revised return. Now this clause (b) provides that such return will have to be filed with in thirty days from the date prescribed for filing the vat audit report under section 61.

The date for filing the vat audit report is 31^st January. Therefore the revised return will have to be filed within thirty days from this date i.e. 1^st March or 2^nd March as the case may be. (It seems that there is mistake made while drafting this clause, instead of inserting the words `with in thirty days’ the words inserted are `after the expiry of thirty days’).

Note that the period mentioned is 30 days from the date prescribed for filing the vat audit report and not the date of filing the vat audit report. Thus even though the report is filed prior to 31^st January say on 30^th September, the due date for revising the return as per this clause (b) will be 1^st or 2^nd March and not before.

(iv) This clause (b) states that ` if as a result of report of audit of accounts prepared for the purpose of section 61’. Thus if any mistake is committed while filing the original return, and the same is unnoticed even while filing the audit report, and after submission of audit report the mistake is noticed and therefore the dealer rectifies the said mistake then clause (a) of sub-section 4 will be applicable and not clause (b) of the said sub-section.

(v) Clause (c) states that if the dealer agrees with the intimation given to him under section 63 of MVAT Act (amended sub-section 7 of section 63 is discussed below), then he may revise the return in respect of the period covered by the said return with in thirty days from the date of service on him of the said intimation.

In short, if during the course of any proceedings or otherwise, it appears to the Commissioner that the dealer has  made mistake in disclosing the tax liability or in claiming the setoff or refund as the case may be, then he will send an intimation to the dealer in the prescribed from (not yet prescribed). If the dealer agrees with this intimation then he has to revise the return with in 30 days from the date of service on him of the said intimation.

(vi) Needless to state that, filing of revised return in both the above situations is a voluntary act to be performed by the dealer. It is not necessary that the dealer has to follow the suggestion made by the auditor or the Commissioner. If the suggestion made by the auditor or the Commissioner is agreeable to the dealer then only he may file the revised return. If the same is not acceptable then in that case he need not file the revised return. If he decides to file the revised return then it has to be filed before the statutory period mentioned in clause (b) or (c) to avoid the penal action.

2) Amendment to section 63:

(i) Section 63 relating to accounts is amended. A new sub-section 7 is inserted and it reads as follows.

If during the course of any proceedings in the case of any dealer or otherwise, it appears to the Commissioner that the quantum of tax payable or, as the case may be, the amount of set-off or refund as disclosed in the returns filed by the dealer or, as the case may be, recorded in the books of accounts of that dealer is incorrect, then the Commissioner may send an intimation in the prescribed Form to such dealer communicating the likely additional quantum of tax, if any, which should have been paid, or the likely reduction in the quantum of set-off or refund and may advise him to file a return or, as the case may be, revised return after taking into account the contents of the intimation.

(ii) This sub-section starts with the words `If during the course of any proceedings’ What is meant by `proceedings? The Concise Oxford Dictionary gives the meaning of the word “proceeding” as used in the legal sense as step taken in legal action. The meaning that is given to the word “proceeding” occurring in one statute cannot be taken as a safe guide for ascertaining the true import of this word appearing in a different enactment. In some enactments this word means an action or that which initiates an action and in other enactments it may mean a step in an action.

Earlier under the BST act, the Hon’ble Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal in the case of Gold Filled Leather Works has held that, `Proceedings under the act means assessment, re-assessment, revision or rectification’. [R.A. 126 of 1968 dt 07/03/69].

Under the MVAT act, we will have to resort to the later view that is step taken in legal action e.g. issuing notice for assessment

(iii) The 1^st line also uses the word `otherwise’. It means this sub-section is applicable in case of any proceedings which are initiated or even in cases where no proceedings are initiated.

Thus even when the proceedings are not initiated the Commissioner may intimate under this section, if it appears to him that the tax payable or setoff or refund as disclosed in the return or recorded in books of accounts is incorrect. E.g. in cross check the Commissioner finds out some discrepancies or in business audit Commissioner comes to know that the tax is paid at a lesser rate or setoff is claimed in excess etc.

(iv ) This intimation will be sent in the prescribed form (form not yet prescribed).

(v) The dealer may decide to accept the suggestion made by the Commissioner and accordingly he may file a return or revised return. This return will have to be filed with in 30 days from the receipt of such intimation. If the same is filed after 30 days, then penalty under sub-section 8 of section 29 will be attracted.

(vii) Similarly, if there is any payment which is paid before filing the return under this section then interest @25 percent will also will have to be paid by the dealer under newly inserted sub-section 4 of section 30 on additional tax which is paid.

(viii) Under this section what is given is just intimation. It does not have a binding force. It’s not an order. If the dealer decides not to abide by that intimation, then he is free to do so. The dealer will have to take a call depending upon the facts of the case. If the issue is highly debatable, then it is better he do not comply with the intimation. But a letter explaining his stand will help the authorities to decide the future course of action and in some cases the further action might be dropped. It is also likely that on non-compliance the case will be taken up for assessment.

The functions which the officer discharges in making assessment are judicial functions which must be faithfully and conscientiously discharged in respect of each assessee and not on any general instructions of their departmental officers or according to any set pattern or any pre-determined formula.

Let’s expect that the officers will not invoke the action under this section invariably but only in cases where he needs to do so.

3) Amendment in section 29

(i) This section deals with the various penalties for different offences committed under the MVAT Act.

(ii) Sub-section 8 which provides for penalty in case of non filing of return within the prescribed time is substituted and it runs as follows.

Where, any person or dealer has failed to file within the prescribed time, a return for any period as provided in section 20, the Commissioner shall impose on him, a sum of rupees five thousand by way of penalty.

Such penalty shall be without prejudice to any other penalty which may be imposed under this Act

(iii) The penalty under this sub-section is attracted when the dealer has failed to file the return as provided under section 20. Section 20 provides for filing of returns. These returns are required to be filed as per provisions made in rule 17 and rule 18. E.g. rule 17 provides for filing of monthly return within 21 days form the end of the month. If the dealer fails to file such return with in the prescribed time of 21 days from the end of the month, then the penalty under sub-section 8 of section 29 is attracted.

(iv) Sub-section 4 of section 20 is also amended on 1^st of July and as per this section the dealer is required to file the return on happening of the event as mentioned in the said –sub-section e.g. On discovering the mistake, a revised return is required to be filed with in the period of nine months. If the revised return is filed after nine months then the penalty under this section will get attracted provided the conditions mentioned in sub-section 8 of section 29 are fulfilled.

(v) So also when as per clause (b) or (c) of sub-section 4 of section 20, the dealer decides to file the return but fails to file the same with in the period prescribed under the said clauses.

(vii) The wordings of this subsection are drastically amended. The same are reproduced below in following table

Before amendment

After amendment

Where, any person or dealer has failed without reasonable cause to file within the prescribed time, a return for any period as provided under section 20, the Commissioner may, after giving the person or dealer a reasonable opportunity of being heard, by order in writing, impose on him, in addition to any tax payable by him, a sum of rupees ten thousand by way of penalty. Such penalty shall be without prejudice to any other penalty, which may be imposed under this Act: Provided that, if the return is filed before the initiation of the proceeding for levy of penalty, the penalty shall be levied at rupees five thousand and in any other case, the penalty shall be levied at rupees ten thousand.

Where, any person or dealer has failed to file within the prescribed time,  a return for any period as provided in section 20,the Commissioner shall impose on him, a sum of rupees five thousand by way of penalty. Such penalty shall be without prejudice to any other penalty which may be imposed under this Act

(viii) Earlier this sub – section used the words `failed without reasonable cause’. However now such words are absent and now the said words are replaced with the words `has failed’. Similarly earlier before imposing the penalty, the authority is required to give `a reasonable opportunity of being heard’. Even such requirement now stands deleted.

(ix) Before this amendment, the penalty was Rs 5000/- before initiation of proceedings for levy of penalty and it was Rs 10,000 after initiation of penalty proceedings. However now it is Rs 5000/- and is not dependent on any notice. The moment there is a failure, the penalty is attracted.

(x) The penalty under this sub-section is attracted when the dealer `fails’ to file the return within the prescribed time. What is meant by `fails’?  Whether it indicates positive and deliberate inaction on the part of the person?

The New Webster’s Dictionary defines the word `fail’ as `to become deficient; or to be inadequate; or to fall short; or to be guilty of omission or neglect etc.

Thus when the dealer took all the steps to file a return but because of the reasons which are beyond his control the same was not filed, it cannot be said that the dealer has failed to file a return. E.g. On 21^st of any particular month when the dealer tried to upload the return he found out that the server of the sales tax department was down or has crashed. In such a situation, can it be said that the dealer has failed to file the return? According to me the answer should be in the negative.

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Balharshah Timber Depot 9 STC 675 [1958] , had the occasion to decide what is meant by “Failed to get himself registered” ,

While deciding the case, it was held that `A person can be said to have “failed to get himself registered” within the meaning of section 11(2) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, when he does not take any steps whatsoever to obtain a registration certificate. When the person has put in a regular application for registration and has not thereafter done anything to prevent or obstruct registration but the authorities concerned are unable for some reason or other to complete registration before a certain time, the dealer concerned cannot be said to have failed to get himself registered’.

(xi) Similarly if the return could not be filed because of the reason of some `act of god’, then according to me penalty can not be levied.

(xii) But unfortunately as the words ` after giving the person or dealer a reasonable opportunity of being heard’ are absent, the authority will levy the penalty without ascertaining the reasons about failure to file the return as especially now with the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Dharamendra Textile Processors and Ors, [Civil Appeal NOs. 10289-10303 Of 2003], everybody is under the impression that penalty is automatic.

But one should not forget what exactly is decided by this judgment. In this case it was held that once the various elements of the section or rule imposing penalty are satisfied/established the imposition of penalty is mandatory and courts/adjudicators do not have any discretion in respect of levy of quantum of penalty.

(xiii) Thus before levying the penalty, the authority has to see that the condition mentioned in the said section regarding `failure’ is satisfied and the said failure is attributable to the dealer. After satisfying this condition, the authority can levy the penalty and not otherwise. So even though the wordings ` after giving the person or dealer a reasonable opportunity of being heard’ are absent, the authority is bound to ascertain the fact that dealer has failed to file the return before levying penalty especially when a particular dealer brings to the notice of the said authority the reasons for non-filing of return in time because of the reasons which are beyond his control.

(xiv) However if the authority levies the penalty without ascertaining such facts then what is the position? Take the same situation mentioned above. A dealer could not file the return due to the fact that on 21^st day of that month, the server of the sales tax department was down. Without ascertaining this fact, the authority imposed the penalty. What is the remedy available to the dealer?

Section 85 relating to bar to certain proceedings is amended and it is provided that no appeal will lie against the order levying penalty under sub-section 8 of section 29. Thus even though the penalty is not attracted but the same is levied, whether the dealer will have any other alternative or he has to pay this penalty of Rs. 5000/- for no fault of his?

4) Amendment in section 30

(i) This section provides for levy of interest in case of non payment of tax with in the prescribed time. Sub-section 4 is added after sub-section 3. The same reads as follows.

If, –

(a) after the commencement of ,-

(i) audit of the business of the dealer in respect of any period, or

(ii) inspection of the accounts, registers and documents pertaining to any period, kept at any place of business of the dealer, or

(iii) entry and search of any place of business or any other place where the dealer has kept his accounts, registers, documents pertaining to any period or stock of goods,

(b) in consequence of any intimation issued under sub-section (7) of section 63,

the dealer files one or more returns or, as the case may be, revised return in respect of the said period, then he shall be liable to pay by way of interest, in addition to the amount of tax, if any, payable as per the return or, as the case may be, revised return, a sum equal to 25 percent of the additional tax payable as per the return or, as the case may be, revised return.

(ii) Thus after the commencement of audit of business under section 22[business audit], or inspection of books of accounts [section 63] or search [section 64], or after an intimation sent under sub-section 7 of section 63[discussed above], the dealer files any return or revised return in respect of the said period, then he shall be liable to pay interest in addition to tax, @ 25% of the additional tax payable as per the return or revised return as the case may be.

(iii) The finance Minister has stated in the Budget Speech that ` Under Value Added Tax system, the dealers are expected to file correct and complete returns and pay taxes accordingly. A penalty up to 100 per cent of evaded tax can be imposed on tax evader. However, if the dealer pays the additional tax found to be due as per Business Audit by the Department and as per intimation sent for the same, then in such cases instead of penalty of 100 per cent. I propose to impose an additional interest of 25 per cent of the additional tax found due.’

(iv) As the intention is to levy the interest instead of penalty and also because of the words `additional interest’, the interest charged under this sub-section is in addition to the interest chargeable under section 30(2). [Under sub-section 2 of section 30, interest is charged @ 1.25% for the delay in making the payment from the due date of filing original return till the date of actual payment].

(v) Though the intention of inserting this provision is made very clear in the budget speech, the authority is not barred from levying the penalty and thus he can levy the penalty under section 29. [e.g. penalty under section 29(3) for knowingly furnishing in accurate particulars of any transaction].

(vi) Thus an amendment to this effect is very much required or at least the direction from the competent authority clarifying that if the liability is admitted by the dealer and the payment of additional tax along with the interest payable under section 30 is paid, then no penalty will be levied under section 29.

(vii) Also note that this is an interest charged under section 30 and not a penalty charged under section 29. Unlike BST Act, there is no provision for remission of interest by the appellate authority once the same is levied by the assessing authority. Therefore, the moment the dealer accepts the intimation letter and files the return or revised return, he is required to pay the interest under this section.

5) Amendment in section 42: In the notification issued under this section, the composition rate for dealers those are caterers, restaurants, eating house etc has been reduced from 8% to 5% subject to the existing conditions and few amended conditions.

Following are the amendments: –

• Rate to be reduced from 8% to 5%.
• Caterers to apply in Form-2 and other dealers (as referred in this entry) to apply in Form-1.
• Application to be made to the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax (Registration) in case dealers are in Mumbai and in case of other dealers to the Joint Commissioner of sales Tax (VAT Administration).
• Condition (iv) stands deleted which dealt the option to opt or to opt out of composition scheme can be exercised only at the beginning of the next year.
• Condition (v) is renumbered as condition (iv) and thereafter three new conditions have been inserted.
• “Condition (v):If the claimant dealer opts for the composition scheme on or after 01^st July 2009 but or of before 30^th September 2009, then he shall be eligible to pay tax under the composition scheme with effect from the 01^st July 2009,”
• “Condition (vi): In case of newly registered dealer, if he applies for composition scheme within one month from the date of grant of registration certificate, then option to join composition would be effective from the date of registration.”
• “Condition (vii):  Subject to conditions (iii), (v) and (vi), if the dealer opts for composition at any time after the 1^st April of any year then the option shall be effective only from the beginning of the next financial year.”

The newly inserted conditions bring out the following position: –

a)      The reduced rate of 5% shall be applicable only and only if the application is made in respective forms to the respective authorities.

b)      In case of new registration if a dealer opts to join composition within one month, then the same would be effective from the date of registration.

c)      Subject to conditions (iii) (application to be made in respective forms to respective authorities), condition (v) (registered dealers to apply before 30^th September 2009) and condition (vi) (newly registered dealer to opt for the composition option within one month from the date of grant of registration), the option becomes effective only at the beginning of the next financial year if the option is exercised in the middle of the year.

d) The most important aspect that one needs to understand is that the condition no. (iv) that existed prior to 01^st July 2009 is deleted. The deleted condition mentioned that a dealer can either opt for composition or opt out of composition subject to conditions mentioned therein. Now, after this amendment, there no mention of the method to opt out of composition. Hence, this seems to be a one way traffic. Accordingly, a dealer has to be very careful before opting for this method.

6) AMENDMENT IN SCHEDULES:

A) Amendment in schedule A

I) (a) After entry 54 in schedule A, a new entry is added at serial no 55 and   it runs as follows

`Incense sticks commonly known as, agarbatti, dhoop, dhupkadi or dhupbatti.  Now these products will attract NIL Tax.  Before the amendment the said goods were covered by entry C -52 which now stands deleted.

(b) As now these goods are tax free, the provisions of clause (a) and (b) of sub rule 2 of rule 53 will be applicable. Till 30^th June 2009, the manufactures of those goods must have claimed full setoff on the purchases of raw material which are used in manufacturing of these goods. Now while filing the returns for the Month of July onwards, they will have to claim the setoff after reduction of 2% on purchases of raw material effected after 1^st July 2009. At the same time they will have to rework the setoff claimed on closing stock of raw material, held by them as on 30^th June 2009 but used in manufacturing after the said date.

(c) There is no need to reduce the setoff claimed on raw material, which is used in manufacturing of finished goods prior to 30^th June 2009 even though the finished goods namely incense sticks are lying in stock as on 30^th June 2009 and were not sold.

(d) As far as reseller of Incense sticks are concerned. If the Incense sticks are lying in stock as on 30^th June 2009, and the same are resold after 30^th June and if the resellers have used certain packing material for packing those goods prior to 30^th June 2009, then they will have to rework the setoff claimed on purchases of packing material which is used in packing of Incense sticks which were lying in stock as on 30^th June 2009 and resold after 30^th June 2009.

In short the manufacturer need not reduce the setoff even though there is stock of Incense sticks as on 30^th June 2009. However, the resellers of those goods will have to rework the setoff claimed on purchases of packing material, if they are having the stock of Incense sticks as on 30^th June 2009.

II) (a) After entry 55 in schedule A following entry is added at serial No. 56.

Solar energy devices as may be notified, from time to time, by State Government in the Official Gazette, and spare parts thereof.

B) Amendment in Schedule B

I) After entry 3 in schedule B, the following entry shall be added, namely :-

“4 Imitation Jewellery, beads of glass, plastics or of any metal other than precious metals and parts and components thereof. These goods will attract tax @ 1%.

C) Amendment in Schedule C

I) Entry 41 reads as `Gypsum of all forms and description’. Now the words `excluding gypsum boards’ are added and thus from 1^st July 2009, gypsum boards stands excluded from this entry.

The Commissioner of Sales Tax in the proceedings under section 56 in the case of India Gypsum Ltd held that `gypsum board’ are the product of gypsum and will not covered under schedule entry C-41 and is taxable @ 12.5% under schedule entry E-1.

Against this judgment when an appeal was filed before the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal ,[Vat Appeal No 5 of 2007 dt 30/10/2007] it was held that `Gypsum board being form of Gypsum is covered by entry C-41’.

To water down the effect of this judgment, the above amendment in entry is made.

II) Entry relating to Imitation jewellery at serial no 51 is amended. The items covered by this entry except hair pins are now covered by schedule B attracting 1% tax. Hair pins are continued in the said entry and the same will attract tax @ 4%.

The other change is that earlier even the `components and parts’ are covered by this entry. However, now only Hair Pins are covered. Thus hair pins are taxable at 4%. But it’s components parts and accessories will attract tax @12.5%.

III) Entry 52 relating to Incense sticks, agarbatti is deleted. This is the consequential amended as now the said products got covered by schedule A, entry no. 55 attracting Nil tax. [The same is discussed above].

IV) Entry 74 is re-numbered as sub-entry (a) thereof; and after sub-entry (a) as so re-numbered , the following sub-entry is added namely :-

“(b) Plastic mats (Chatai).  Needless to say that the same will attract tax @ 4%.

V) Entry 105 relating to Embroidery material is amended and the product `glass beads’ is deleted from the said entry. Before the amendment, Glass beads as an embroidery material was covered by this entry and Glass beads in general were covered by entry C-51. Now all Glass Beads are covered by entry 4 of schedule B attracting 1% Tax.

VI) Entry 108(2) relating to timber is amended and the rate of tax @ 4% will be continued till 31/3/2010. This amendment is w.e.f. 01^st of April 2009. In short, timber will be continued to be taxed at 4% from 01^st April 2009 till 31/3/2010.

Even though, for the intervening period,  the dealer has paid the tax @ 12.5%, instead of 4%, he can claim the refund subject to provisions of section 29(10). Even if the said dealer is assessed to tax @ 12.5%, he can file the appeal or application for rectification and can claim the refund again subject to provisions of section 29(10).

VII) After entry 109, the following entries are added, namely :

110  Clearing nuts (Shikekai) and Soap nuts (Ritha) in whole or powder form.

111 Compact Fluorescent Lamps. (CPA Not covered)

112 LPG Stoves for domestic use; parts, components and accessories thereof.

113 Cotton ginning and pressing machinery covered by sub-heading 8445 19 10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CPA not covered)

114 Composting Machinery. (CPA not covered)

Needless to state that all above goods will attract tax @ 4%.

D) Amendment in schedule D

I) The rate of tax on following three commodities is increased from 20% to 25%

i) Foreign Liquor as defined from time to time, in rule 3(6)(1) of the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules 1952

ii) Country Liquor a defined in the Maharashtra Country Liquor Rules, 1973.

iii) Liquor imported from any place outside the territory India as defined from time to time, in rule 3(4) of the Maharashtra Foreign Liquor (Import and Export) Rules 1963.

On the bottles containing liquor, MRP inclusive of taxes is printed. Naturally upto 30/6/2009, as the tax was 20%, the MRP was mentioned after considering the rate of tax @ 20%. The stock of Liquor which was held as on 30^th June 2009,  will have to be sold at old MRP (unless the new MRP is printed) by paying the tax @ 25%.

II) After entry 11, the following entry is added at serial no 12 namely:-

‘Tobacco, manufactured tobacco and products thereof including cigar and cigarettes but excluding those to which entry 45A of Schedule A and Entry 101 of Schedule C applies.

Before the amendment there were two entries for Tobacco and it’s products namely

Entry A-45A (inserted from 01/04/2007) which reads as follows

(a) Un-manufactured tobacco covered under tariff Heading No 2401 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986)

(b) Biris covered under tariff item No 24031031, 24031039, 24031099 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986)

This entry covers unmanufactured tobacco and bidis.  Unmanufactured tobacco will mean tobacco cleared under heading 2401 of the Central Excise Tariff.  Bidis covered by tariff items 2405 1031, 2403 1039, 2403 1090 will also be exempted from tax.  All other tobacco products covered by chapter 24 of the Central Excise Tariff (e.g. Cigarettes, cigar, cheroots, snuff, Jarda scented tobacco, gutkha, tobacco extracts and essences including quimaam) will be taxable @ 12.5%.

The above products covered by this entry are tax free.

The second entry is Entry C-101 and it reads as follows.

Varieties of Sugar, tobacco, textile articles as may be notified from time to time by the State Government in the official Gazette.

Actually this entry is created for the restriction of 4% put by section 15 of the CST act (declared goods). Actually the notification which was supposed to be issued for notifying the tobacco or it’s products is never issued.

If you can recollect from 1/4/2007, The Central Sales Tax Act was amended, and section 14 was amended so as to exclude the tobacco and tobacco products. At the same time Tobacco has also been dropped from the First Schedule of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957.

Thus tobacco and it’s products not covered by entry A-45A are liable to tax @ 12.5% from 1/4/2007 as nothing was covered by entry C 101.

Now any tobacco or its products which are not covered by entry A -45A will get covered by entry D 12 and will attract tax @ 20%.

III) The Government of Maharashtra has excluded ‘Wine’ from entry 1 and 3 of Svhedule D with effect from 01^st August 2009 vide notification No VAT 1509/CR-109/Taxation -1. In the same notification a new entry 3A has been inserted as follows:

Sr No	Name of Commodity	Rate of Tax
3A	“Wines, as defined, from time to time, in rule 3(6)(1) of Bombay Liquor Rules, 1953 and in rule 3(4) of the Maharashtra Foreign Liquor (Import and Export) Rules, 1963.”	20%

Hence, from 01^st of August the rate of tax on Wine as mentioned in the schedule entry shall be 20%.