The Commissioner, Commercial ... vs S/S Om House Hold Appliances Pvt. ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 1333 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

AFR
 
Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 166 of 2018
 

 
Applicant :- The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Lucknow
 
Opposite Party :- S/S Om House Hold Appliances Pvt. Ltd.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Ashok Kumar,J.

Heard Sri Bipin Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revisionist at length.

The instant revision petition has been filed by the Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P., by which the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal dated 09.03.2018 passed in Second Appeal No. 342 of 2010 (assessment year 2006-07) has been challenged.

The brief facts of the case are that the opposite party dealer was carrying on the business of purchase and sale of crockery and tray made from melamine. The dealer has affected the sales of melamine tray and has admitted and paid the tax @ 8% treating it covered as a plastic goods, whereas on the sale of crockery the dealer has admitted and paid the tax @ 12%.

The case of the dealer is that he deals in different kind of cups, plates, glasses, spoons and other crockery items which are used by the consumers during their eating time. The said all items are in the category of the crockery whereas he claims that so far as the melamine tray is concerned it is not covered as a crockery item nor it is used as the crockery item by the consumers.

The assessing authority has passed an assessment order treating the melamine tray as a crockery item and has taxed the same @ 12% plus State Development Tax @ 1%.

Aggrieved by the order passed by the assessing authority treating the melamine tray as a crockery item, the assessee went in appeal before the First Appellate Authority and the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 18.02.2010 allowed the appeal and has held that the melamine tray is a plastic goods as such is covered under the Notification No. KAN999-2-709/XI-9(115)/2000 UP Act-15/48 Order (4)-2003/ Date 15-2-2003.

The First Appellate Authority after detail discussion and after due consideration of the aforesaid notification has arrived at the conclusion that the purchases affected by the assessee mostly relates to one M/s. House Hold and Appliances Ltd., Rajkot, Gujarat and the melamine tray is mentioned as a separate item. He has discussed the nature and use of melamine tray as a plastic goods while considering and arriving to the conclusion he has considered that in the case of assessee itself the assessing authority in the previous assessment year has treated the melamine tray as a plastic goods and charged the tax @ 8%.

On enquiry as to whether the department has proceeded to revise the order of the assessing authority treating the melamine tray as plastic goods or not, learned Standing Counsel fairly accepted that the said order has become final.

It would be relevant to see the use of crockery. The old versions of crockery, such as cups, saucers, and plates that were once in common use in many diners, tend to be a little heavier than more formal types of hollowware, such as fine chine. While heavier and simple in design, it is possible to set an attractive table using this type of old time crockery, since the simplicity of the designs make it possible to use the various dishes to great effect with all sorts of accessories.

It is further necessary to place the other details which are available with respect of crockery in broad term the crockery is used to refer to various types of tableware. This would include any type of dishware that is used at the table during mealtime. Crockery can include all forms of dishes such as plates, as well as serving platters, bowls, and dishes that are used to hold condiments, such as a gravy bowl. Traditionally, crockery is applied to any type of dinnerware that is made from natural materials. This could include plates, cups, and serving dishes that are composed of clay that has been fired and prepared for use on a recurring basis. While technically this would also include fine china and porcelain dinnerware. Crockery was usually a term applied to dishes that were intended for use for more casual situations, such as a simple family meal.

Purists tend to also omit some of the modern types of dinnerware from the definition of crockery. Plastic dishes, or dinnerware that is manufactured using other synthetic materials that make the dishes difficult to break may not be considered proper crockery, even though they are usually intended for regular use in a casual setting. However, as these forms of dishware have become more common in many households, their acceptance as meeting the basic definition of crockery has become more common.

In general, crockery tends to have a simple and somewhat utilitarian design. While there are exceptions, crockery usually features little or no decoration. The emphasis is on holding up well to repeated use.

In various dictionaries the item crockery normally mentioned as crockery are cups, plates and dishes that is प्याले, प्लेटें, तश्तरियाँ और बर्तन इत्यादि।

In one of the dictionary edited by Father Kamil Bulke the meaning of crockery is given in hindi as चीनी के बर्तन।

So far as melamine is concerned it is a white crystalline compound made by heating cyanamide and used in making plastics.

Further a plastic used chiefly for laminated coatings, made by copolymerizing melamine with formaldehyde.

From the bare perusal of the aforesaid details and description of crockery and melamine admittedly prmia facie it appears that both the items are different altogether as well as their use is entirely different by their user.

It is further relevant to place the exact meaning of Tray. Tray means a flat piece of wood, plastic, metal, etc. with slightly higher edges that one can use for carrying food, drink, etc. In hindi the meaning of Tray is "खाद्य और पेय पदार्थों को ले जाने के लिए प्रयुक्त लकड़ी, प्लास्टिक, धातु आदि की बड़ी तश्तरी" and in a dictionary the meaning of tray is given as under:

"A flat, shallow container with a raised rim, typically used for carrying food and drink, or for holding small items or loose material."

Since the First Appellate Authority has proceeded to hold that the melamine tray is taxable @ 8% treating the same being the plastic goods by following decision of the assessing authority in the case of the assessee itself, the department has filed an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 09.03.2018 has upheld the order passed by the First Appellate Authority by recording the following findings of fact:-

"6. विचाराधीन मामले में पाया गया कि व्यापारी द्वारा राजकोट स्थित फर्म सर्वश्री होम हाऊस होल्ड एप्लाईन्सेस प्रा0 लि0 द्वारा भेजे गए माल की बिक्री करते हैं तथा उनके द्वारा निर्धारित की गई दर से उसकी बिक्री की जाती है। इस प्रकार माल स्टाक ट्रांसफर होकर आता है तथा प्रिंसिपल द्वारा जो बिक्री की दर निर्धारित की जाती है उसी दर पर बिक्री की जाती है। इन परिस्थितियों में जो हानि दर्शायी जा रही है, वह निश्चित रूप से उचित नहीं है। फार्म-31 पर ग्लास वेयर लिखे जाने के कारण कर-निर्धारण अधिकारी द्वारा ग्लास वेयर की भांति जो कर आरोपित किया गया है, वह उचित नहीं है। बिलों में वास्तव में क्रोकरी ही मंगाया जाना प्रमाणित है। मेला माईन ट्रे के संबंध में कर निर्धारण अधिकारी द्वारा जो टिप्पणी दी है, उसमें यह तर्क किया है कि मेला माईन से विभिन्न प्रकार की टाईल्स किचिन वेयर तथा फैब्रीक्स आदि का निर्माण होता है। वास्तव में यह हीट रैजिस्टेन्स अधिक होने के कारण उस पर क्राकरी की भांति कर आरोपित किए जाने का निर्णय लिया गया है। इस संबंध में व्यापारी द्वारा यह कहा गया कि मेला माईन ट्रे प्लास्टिक की श्रेणी में आता है। कमिश्नर, व्यापार कर, उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा जारी परिपत्र को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए इस पर प्लास्टिक की भांति 8 प्रतिशत की दर से कर आरोपित किया जाना चाहिए। विगत वर्ष में भी व्यापारी की मेला माईन ट्रे को प्लास्टिक की भांति कर आरोपित किया गया है। ट्रे को वास्तव में किचिन वेयर के रूप में प्रयुक्त होना आवश्यक नहीं हैं। इसके अतिरिक्त उनका उपयोग अन्य कार्यों में भी होता है। इस प्रकार मेला माईन ट्रे पर 8 प्रतिशत की दर से कर आरोपित किया जाना उचित है, जिसकी पुष्टि प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी द्वारा भी की गई है।

7. ऐसी स्थिति में कर-निर्धारण अधिकारी के स्तर से जो कर आरोपित किया गया है वह विधिसम्मत नहीं है तथा इनके विरुद्ध योजित प्रथम अपील में व्यापारी की अपील स्वीकार करते हुए आरोपित कर को समाप्त किए जाने का जो निर्णय लिया गया है, वह हमारे विचार से विधिक एवं तथ्यात्मक आधार पर पूर्णतः उचित है तथा इसमें अधिकरण की द्वितीय अपील प्राधिकारी की क्षेत्राधिकारिता में हस्तक्षेप किए जाने का कोई आधार नहीं है। अपील की सुनवाई के समय विद्वान डिप्टी कमिश्नर एवं राज्य प्रतिनिधि भी प्रथम अपीलीय निर्णय में कोई त्रुटि इंगित करने में सफल नहीं रहे हैं। अतः विभाग द्वारा प्रस्तुत अपील बलहीन होने के कारण अस्वीकार किए जाने योग्य है।"

In view of the aforesaid findings of fact, there is no reason to interfere in the matter, hence the revision filed by the Commissioner has no legs and is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 3.7.2018

SK Srivastava