LexRANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. versus MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ROPAR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.
v.
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ROPAR
NOVEMBER 2, 2006
[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND TARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.]
Punjab Municipal Committee Act: Schedule, Entries 40(a) and 40(e)-
Commercial Heavy Chemicals-Octroi duty-Levy of-Assessee paying octroi
C duty under Entry 40(a) for 13 continuous years-Revenue seeking classification
under Entry 40(e)-High Court holding in favour of revenue-Correctness
of-Held: Not correct as burden to prove that a product falls under a particular
tariff item is on revenue which it failed to discharge-Matter remitted to High
Court for fresh consideration.
D
The appellant had been paying octroi duty on Commercial Heavy
Chemicals brought by it to its factory continuously for 13 years under
Entry 40(a) of the Schedule of the Punjab Municipal Committee Act. The
respondent sought to change the classification of the said product to Entry
40(e) without change of circumstance and without discharging the burden
E of proof·cast on it to show that the product falls in that entry. The High
Court allowed the claim of respondent. Hence the present appeal.
Disposing of the appeal and remitting the matter to High Court, the
Court
F
HELD: 1. The High Court has not properly interpreted the Entries,
which is contrary to the settled principles of interpretation. The burden
of proof to show that a product falls within a particular tariff item is
always on the revenue. The respondent, Municipal Council has failed to
establish and justify the burden of proof, the taxability ingredient of the
appellant's goods under Entry 40, sub-clause (e). The High Court has failed
G to appreciate that it is the respondent-Revenue Authority which is cast
with the duty of assessing octroi to be imposed on the appellant and that
the said respondent, Municipal Council has for 13 continuous years
assessed the goods in question under Entry 40(a) of the Schedule as heavy
commercial che.micals. (363-G, H; 364-A-BJ
H
360
-
!
RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. v. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ROPAR [LAKStt¥ANAN, J.] 361
2. The High Court, iq cases, like this, ought to have ordered notice A
to the respondent and disposed of the matter after hearing both the parties
and after ascertaining as to which rate of duty Entry is applicable and
payable for the product in question. The interest of justice would require
that another opportunity should· be given to both the parties to argue the
appeal afresh and on merits. The appellant is directed to pay a Yi% duty H
for the product till the disposal of the Second Appeal. The Respondent -
Municipal Council is directed to receive the same without prejudice to the
rights and contentions in the Second Appeal and the final outc{)me of the
Second Appeal. (364-B, D, F, G)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4657 of2006. (!:
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 18.2.2005 of the High Court
of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.S.A. No. 704/2005.
Arun Jaitley, Soli J. Sorabjee, H.S. Mathew, Rupinder Singh Suri, Vinay
K. Shailendra and Ajay Dahiya for the Appellant.
D
A.P. Bhandari and S.C. Patel for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. Leave granted.
The above appeal is directed against the final judgment/order dated
18.2.2005 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
in R.S.A. no.704 of 2005. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant in this
appeal. The respondent is the Municipal Council, SAS Nagar, Mohali.
We have perused pleadings and the judgments of all the three courts
and heard the arguments of Mr. Arun Jaitley, learned Senior Counsel for the
appellant and Mr. A.P. Bhandari, learned counsel for the respondent.
The issue which arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether
an entry in a tariff schedule which after specifying the subject matter of the G
entry and illustrating it with examples by using the word 'like' can be construed
as being limited to only the items listed by way of illustration or includes all
such products as answer the classification of the entry and further whether
the revenue· can change the classification of the product from the specific
enumerated entry, which was accepted for 13 years to the residuary clause H
362
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006) SUPP. 8 S.C.R.
A without any change of circumstance and without discharging the burden of
. proof cast on the revenue to show that the particular product falls in the
residµary tExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.