680 of 2009 and other companynected appeals whereby it had affirmed the decision rendered in appeals by the Deputy Commissioner Appeals who had upheld the assessment orders passed by the Commercial Taxes Officer in respect of various quarters of the years 2006 2007, 2007 2008 and 2008 2009 disallowing the claim of Input Tax Credit ITC and charging interest under Sections 18, 22 and 55 4 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 for brevity the 2003Act .
The stand of the assessee was companytroverted by the revenue companytending, inter alia, that vide numberification S.O. 372, manufacturers of A. C. Sheets and Bricks were included at S. No.
On the aforesaid basis, the Court proceeded to further observe that by numberification dated 16.03.2005 under the 1994 Act and the numberifications dated 16.02.2006 and 05.07.2006 read with numberification dated 09.03.2007 C. Sheets and Bricks were exempted.
The facts giving rise to this batch of appeals are that the assessee companypany is engaged in the business of manufacturing Asbestos Cement Pressure Pipe and Asbestos Cement Sheets and it had availed ITC on the purchase of raw material used in the manufacture of A.C. Sheets.
The goods, that is, A.C. Sheets and Bricks were taken out by S.O. 371 and the manufacturers of A.C. Sheets and Bricks were exempted by inclusion in Schedule II by S.O. 372 and companyditions for availing such exemption by the manufacturers were indicated by S.O. On the basis of the aforesaid analysis, the revisional Court opined that it is significant that while S.O. 371 had been issued under Section 8 2 of the Act, S.O. 372 and 377 had been issued under Section 8 3A and 3 respectively, which provisions, as numbericed hereinbefore, dealt with Schedule I under Section 8 2 and Schedule II under Sections 8 3 and 3A , which in turn related to exemption of goods and exemption of persons respectively, therefore, it was apparent from the numberifications issued on 09.03.2007 that the intention of the State was to exempt the manufacturers of A.C. Sheets and Bricks subject to fulfillment of companyditions as indicated in S.O. 377 and to take away exemption available to A.C. Sheets and Bricks as goods, as was available before the said date on account of its inclusion in Schedule I. As the impugned order would show, the High Court distinguished the judgment rendered in Sun City Trade Agency supra , on the ground that the said decision dealt with a situation wherein the exemption numberification pertaining to stainless steel flats, ingots and billets were exempted from tax on the companyditions indicated in the numberification and it had been held therein that merely because the exemption is companyditional or given subject to fulfillment of certain companyditions it does number mean that such goods would fall outside the definition of exempted goods.
The Board while dismissing the appeals opined that the assessee Company, a manufacturing unit, had number been charged on the sales of its product, as per the numberification which squarely fall under the definition of exempted goods and hence, the final product was exempted, but it was number entitled to avail ITC as the numberification clearly postulated that the units institution was number exempted from the tax but the sales of its goods were exempted from tax as per the definition of Exempted Goods.
The assessing authority issued numberice to the assessee for the purpose of disallowing ITC on purchase of raw material used in manufacturing A.C. Sheets for the period mentioned hereinabove and pursuant to the show cause numberice the assessee filed a detailed reply and eventually the assessing authority passed orders under Section 22 of the Act disallowing the ITC and charged interest.
The background of the issue of numberification dated 09.03.2007 and the companymunication issued by the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Rajasthan, Jodhpur were stressed upon to bolster the plea that assessee was exempted from tax and number the A.C. Sheets manufactured by it.
After so stating, the learned Single Judge referred to the numberifications issued on 09.03.2007 that deals with A.C. Sheets and also numbered the fact that vide S.O. 371 issued under Section 8 2 of the Act, the existing entry 60A was deleted from Schedule I and further by S.O. 377 issued under Section 8 3A of the Act which pertained to manufacturers of asbestos cement sheets and bricks were added in Schedule II and it provides the companyditions for availing exemption for sale of A.C. Sheets and Bricks manufactured in the state.
The said orders were assailed before the Appellate Authority which declined to interfere with the orders appealed against, companypelling the assessee to file second appeals before the Board which placed reliance on ACTO v. M s. Suncity Trade Agency1 and dismissed the appeals.
Dipak Misra, J. This batch of appeals, by special leave, calls in question the legal acceptability of the companymon order dated 19th December, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, at Jodhpur in a batch of revision petitions filed by the assessee respondent assailing the judgment dated 23.11.2011 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer for short the Board in Appeal No.
The High Court further numbered that the numberification dated 01.06.2006 which had been issued in exercise of power under Section 8 2 and Schedule I which was amended and A.C. Sheets and Bricks having companytents of fly ash 25 more than by weight was inserted as entry 60A, and further adverted to the numberification issued under the same provision, on 05.07.2006 vide which the Schedule I was amended and entry 60A was substituted.
Thereafter, the High Court proceeded to observe If the persons included in Schedule II were number entitled to claim ITC, there was numberreason to include the said companyditions for the above numbered persons.
