Case Law Details
Unique Engineers Vs Commissioner Commercial Tax Lko (Allahabad High Court)
Admittedly, the revisionist manufactured ‘AT-PLAST’ which are being used in mixing of ready mix concrete / concrete and it has been averred by the revisionist that the said product are being used along with concrete for reducing the uses of water, delay the time of freezing as well as strengthening the concrete. In para 7 as well as in the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal, details of the chemicals used in manufacturing of the product i.e. ‘AT-PLAST’ were being given and on the strength of which, the revisionist claimed that the said goods are chemical and duly covered under Entry 29, Schedule II and the same are liable to be taxed at the rate of 4 %, but the Tribunal has not considered the same.
Learned counsel for the revisionist had relied upon the judgement of this Court dated 28.8.2014 passed in a bunch of tax revisions leading case No. Sales / Trade Tax Revision No. 457 of 2014 (The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, UP, Lucknow Vs. M/S Cico Technology Limited, Ghaziabad) where in, this Court while considering the case of waterproofing components and construction materials has held that the said items will be covered under the head of chemical and are liable to tax accordingly.
In the case in hand, none of the authorities have discussed raw material / chemicals used in manufacturing of ‘AT-PLAST’ or the chemical analysis report as furnished by the revisionist in support of its case but had decided the issue, which cannot be justified in the eyes of law.
In view of above, the revision is allowed. The impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for deciding the issue afresh keeping in mind the order & judgement of ‘Cico Technology Ltd. (supra).’
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
