SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 323

SUHAS C.SEN, SUJATA V.MANOHAR
G. Radhakrishna Murthy, Company – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer-ivb, Vijayawada – Respondent


JUDGMENT

SEN, J. - These are appeals from an order passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court by which large number of writ petitions were disposed of. The common question involved in all those writ petitions was whether agarbattis were liable to sales tax under Item 36 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The writ petitioners and the other dealers in agarbattis were paying sales tax on agarbattis as general goods taxable at the rate of 4% up to 8-7-1983 and 5% from 8-7-1983. Item 36 of the First Schedule of the Act was amended thereafter and the amended entry at the material point of time which fell for consideration of the High Court was as under :

"36. Cosmetics and toilet preparations including scents, perfumes, face powders, talcum powders, hair tonics, hair oils, face creams and snows, pomades, depilatories, tooth powder, toothpaste, toothbrushes and shaving creams."

2. It may be noticed that the only change that was brought by the amendment was to include scents and perfumes within Entry 36. The Departments stand is that "perfumes" would include agarbattis and this stand found favour with the High Court. The High Court mainly relied on the judgment

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top