SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.F. Nariman, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.
M/s. Shanti Fragrances – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 8485, 8486, 8487, 8488, 8491-8494, 8495 of 2011, Civil Appeal Nos. 8496-8501 of 2011, Civil Appeal No. 8502 of 2011, Civil Appeal No. 8617 of 2014, Civil Appeal Nos. 10374-10379 of 2014
Decided On : 21-09-2017
Pan Masala containing tobacco - Taxability under Delhi Sales Tax Act, U.P. Trade Tax Act, and Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act - Section 3(1), Section 7, Section 4 - The judgment concerns the taxability of Pan Masala containing tobacco under three State legislations. The court discussed the provisions of Section 3(1), Section 7, and Section 4 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, and their implications on the tax liability of Pan Masala containing tobacco. The court also considered the conflict between different lines of Supreme Court judgments on the interpretation of tax provisions and their impact on the tax liability of specific goods.
Fact of the Case:
The case concerns the taxability of Pan Masala containing tobacco under three State legislations. The central question raised in all these appeals is the tax liability of Pan Masala containing tobacco under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, and the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the provisions of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, and the conflicting interpretations of tax provisions by different High Courts. The court found a direct conflict between different lines of Supreme Court judgments on the interpretation of tax provisions and their impact on the tax liability of specific goods.
Issues: The main issue was the tax liability of Pan Masala containing tobacco under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, and the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the distinction between the incidence of tax and exemption of tax on the one hand and the rate of tax on the other. It also highlighted the conflict between different lines of Supreme Court judgments on the interpretation of tax provisions and their impact on the tax liability of specific goods.
Final Decision: The court requested the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate Bench to decide on the conflicting interpretations of tax provisions and to lay down the guiding principles for future cases.
JUDGMENT :
R.F. Nariman, J.
This batch of cases concerns Pan Masala containing tobacco and Gutka and their taxability under three State legislations, namely, the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The central question raised in all these appeals is the same. We shall first take up the Delhi case.
2. Under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, all sales (of goods) that are effected after the commencement of the Act, are made to suffer tax under Section 3(1) of the Delhi Act, whose marginal note reads "incidence of tax". Section 3 (1) states as under:-
"3. Incidence of Tax
(1) Every dealer whose turnover during the year immediately preceding the commencement of this Act exceeds the taxable quantum and every dealer who at the commencement of this Act, is registered or is liable to pay tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956) shall be liable to pay tax under this Act on all sales effected by him on or after such commencement."
The obverse side of incidence of tax is provided by Section 7 of the said Act, which reads as under:-
"7. Tax free goods
(1) No tax shall be payable under this Act on the sale of goods specified in the Third Schedule subject to the conditions and exceptions, if any, set out therein.
(2) The Lieutenant Governor may by notification in the Official Gazette, add to, or omit from, or otherwise amend, the Third Schedule either retrospectively or prospectively, and thereupon the Third Schedule shall be deemed to be amended accordingly:
PROVIDED that no such amendment shall be made retrospectively if it would have the effect of prejudicially affecting the interests of any dealer."
3. Under Section 4, the marginal note of which reads "rate of tax", if tax is payable by a dealer under the Act, various rates in respect of taxable turnover are set out depending upon whether the goods are "declared goods" under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 or are goods which suffer tax at the rate of either twelve paise or twenty paise in the rupee, depending upon whether they are specified in the First Schedule or Fourth Schedule of the Act. In addition, food or drink served for consumption in a hotel or restaurant with which a cabaret, floor show or similar entertainment is provided, is taxed at the rate of forty paise in the rupee. All cases not covered by the above are then covered by a residuary sub-clause, in which the relevant rate at the given time was eight paise in the rupee. Section 4 of the said Act reads as under:
"4. Rate of tax
(1) The tax payable by a dealer under this Act shall be levied -
(a) in the case of taxable turnover in respect of the goods specified in the First Schedule, at the rate of twelve paise in the rupee;
(b) in the case of taxable turnover in respect of the goods specified in Schedule II, at such rate not exceeding four paise in rupee as the Central Government may, from time to time, by notification in the official Gazette, determine;
(c) in the case of taxable turnover in respect of any food or drink served for consumption in a hotel or restaurant or part thereof, with which a cabaret, floor show or similar entertainment is provided therein, at the rate of forty paise in the rupee;
[(cc) in the case of taxable turnover in respect of the goods specified in the Fourth Schedule, at the rate of twenty paise in the rupee;]
[(ccc) [***]
(d) in the case of taxable turnover of any other goods, at the rate of eight paise in the rupee:
[PROVIDED that the Lieutenant Governor may, by notification in the Official Gazette, add to, or omit from, or otherwise amend, the First Schedule, the Second Schedule or the Fourth Schedule, either retrospectively or prospectively, and there upon the First Schedule or the Second Schedule or, as the case may be, the Fourth Schedule, shall be deemed to be amended accordingly:]
PROVIDED FURTHER that no such amendment shall
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, New Delhi v. Vatika Township Private Limited
Commissioner, Sales Tax U.P. v. M/s Agra Belting Works
Kothari Products Ltd. v. Government of A.P.
Pradeep Kumar Biswas (Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology
Reliance Trading Company v. State of Kerala
Reliance Trading Company, Kerala v. State of Kerala
Sabhajit Tewary (Sabhajit Tewary v. Union of India
Sales Tax Officer, Section IX, Kanpur v. Dealing Dairy Products and Another
State of Bihar and Others v. Krishna Kumar Kabra and Another
State of Orissa v. Radheshyam Gudakhu Factory
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.