BHATIA SPORTS COMPANY Vs. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this Commercial Tax Revision, the revisionist is challenging the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-1, Dehradun dtd. 25/8/2012, as confirmed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Uttarakhand, Dehradun Bench, Dehradun in Second Appeal No. 141 of 2012 dtd. 2/7/2013.

(2.) The simple question that arises for consideration in this case is whether fitness equipment like dumbbell, treadmill, exerciser etc. shall be included in Entry No. 106 of Schedule II (B) of the Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "VAT Act, 2005", for brevity), and shall be liable to tax @ 4%, which was prevailing at the relevant time. The assessment relates to the year 2008-09.

(3.) Mr. S.K. Posti, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revisionist, relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Cosco Industries Ltd. v. State of U.P. and others; [2009 NTN (Vol. 40)], and submits that fitness equipment should come within Entry No. 106 of Schedule II (B) of the VAT Act, 2005.