MARICO LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revisions have been filed assailing the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Lucknow dated 28.3.2011. They arise out of various appeals filed by the revisionist before the Tribunal and have been decided by a common order and therefore the aforesaid revisions involve common question of law and fact and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The question of law involved in these revisions are as to whether pure coconut oil which is manufactured by the revisionist is taxable at 4% under entry 43 or entry 131 of Schedule II Part A of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008. The other question of law in the case is as to whether Revive Instant Starch, which is also manufactured by the revisionist and which contains 90% tapioca starch and about 3% of other additives is liable to be charged to tax under Entry 118 of Schedule II Part A of VAT Act, 2008 or was liable to be treated as an unclassified item chargeable to tax at 12.5%.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the revisionist is a registered Company manufacturing 100% pure coconut oil having a license under the Food Adulteration Act and the same is sold in the market as coconut oil and on the packaging it is mentioned as "A premium quality 100% pure edible oil made from the finest coconut". The assessing officer however treated coconut oil as an unclassified item on the ground that under the common perception coconut oil is associated more with hair oil under the brand name of Parachute. The assessing officer held that the coconut oil of the brand name Parachute is commonly understood as hair oil and is therefore liable to tax at 12.5% under the unclassified list item no. 5. For purposes of arriving at this conclusion, the assessing officer has placed reliance upon the decision in the case of M/s Bombay Oil Industries Ltd. Vs. CTT,1979 UPTC 573. So far as Starch under the brand name of Revive is concerned, the same was treated an unclassified item.