LexSONIC ELECTROCHEM AND ANR. versus SALES TAX OFFICER AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B SONIC ELECTROCHEM AND ANR. v. SALES TAX OFFICER AND ORS. AUGUST 11, 1998 [S.P. BHARUCHA AND G.B. PATTANAIK JJ.] Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969--Schedule II Part A Entry 129 and 98- Mosquito repel/ants-Classification of C The appellant was the manufacturer of JET-MAT which was classified as a "mosquito repellant" by the respondent and sought to be text under Entry 129 of Schedule II Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. The appellant challenged the validity of Entry 129 of Schedule II Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 on the ground that it violates Article 14 of the D Constitution of India. The High Court dismissed the petition of the appellant. E In his appeal to this Court, the appellant only contended that JET-MAT manufactured by the appellant is an insecticide and not a repellant and therefore, could be exempted from tax under Entry 98 of Schedule II Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. Dismissing the appeal, this court HELD : In view of the specific Entry 129 dealing with mosquito repellants it is difficult to accept the contention that the product in question will not come within the ambit of Entry 129 since one of its constituents 'd-Allethrin F 4%' happens to be an insecticide. The product JET-MAT which is the trade name containing 'd-Allethrin 4%' and is commercially known as 'Mosquito Repellant Mat' is a mosquito repellant notwithstanding the fact that it not only repels the mosquitoes but also is capable of killing the mosquitoes. It is difficult to hold that it is an insecticide entitled for partial exemption G under Entry 98 of the Act.11104-E-F) Bombay Chemical Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay ( 1995) Supp. 2 SCC 646, cited. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6753 of H 1994. 1102 SONIC ELECTROCHEM v. SALES TAX OFFICER [PATTANAIK, J.) 1103 From the Judgment and Order dated 7/8.4.94 of the Gujarat High Court A .; in S.C. Application No. 3711of1994. Vivek Gambhir for the Appellants. Ms. Hemantika Wahi for the Respondents B The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATTANAIK, J. The short question that arises in this appeal is whether - .._. JET-MAT produced by the appellant would come within Entry 129 of Schedule II Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') issued under Section 49 of the Act. The said entry at the relevant point C of time read thus : S.No. 129 Description of goods Mosquito Repellents Rate of sales tax Twelve paise in the rupee Rate of purchase tax Twelve paise in the rupee Though in the High Court appellant had challenged the validity of Entry 129 of Schedule II Part A of the Act on the ground that it violates Article 14 of the Constitution and the High Court negatived the same, the appellant D in this appeal does not challenge the said conclusion of the High Court. After examining different entries the High Court by the impugned judgment came E to the conclusion that JET-MAT is nothing but a mosquito repellent within the ambit of Entry 129, and therefore, is taxable. Mr. Salve learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the JET-MAT manufactured by the appellant is an insecticide and not a repellent would therefore could be exempted from tax under entry 98 to the F • . .,. extent contained therein and the conclusion of the High Court that it is a repellent and as such taxable under Entry 129 is erroneous. In support of this contention Mr. Salve referred to the Certificate of Registration in favour of the appellant issued under Section 9(3) of the Insecticides Act, 1968, the leaflet and the approved label of the commodity in question, the formulation contents G of the said commodity and the chemistry of the active ingredients and submitted that all these documents unequivocally indicate the product in question to be an insecticide. The learned counsel also submitted that an · · ..,. exemption notification has to be construed broadly and widely as has been held by this Court in the case of Bombay Chemical Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, [1995] Supp. 2 SCC 646, and consequently there H 1104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1998] 3 S.C.R. A would be no justification n'ot to hold the JET-MAT to be an insecticide and as such exempted from levy of sales tax on the sale and purchase of the same under Entry 98 of the Act. Mr. Salve also in this connection placed reliance on a decision of the M
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.