K. VINOD CHANDRAN, RAJIV ROY
Marico Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
K. Vinod Chandran, CJ. – Two appeals from the common order dated 11.03.2005 of the Commercial Taxes Tribunal (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’) in a Miscellaneous Case and Revision Case, agitate the same issue. The appellant, a dealer under the provisions of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for brevity ‘Act of 2005’) approached the authority under Section 77 for a ruling as to whether coconut oil, sold by it, would be taxed at the rate of 12.5% as a residuary item or at the rate of 4% as a commodity coming within Schedule-III.
2. The assessment year is 2005-06; the year in which the Value Added Tax regime was enforced in the State of Bihar, as in the other states. Initially, Entry 27 of Schedule-III contained edible oil and oil cakes which, by a notification dated 09.07.2005 was amended to read as “edible oils (other than coconut oil) or oil cakes.” Hence, up to 09.07.2005, the commodity was an edible oil liable to a lesser rate of tax as provided for Schedule-III goods. Even after the amendment of 09.07.2005, coconut oil would be taxable at the rate of 4% being a vegetable oil, which was included under Entry 82, which entry was substituted out by notification dated 01.04.2006, is the
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.