PREM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present appeal under section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, "the Act"), the appellant has raised the following substantial questions of law:

(2.) The learned Excise and Taxation Commissioner in its order dated August 27, 2008 (annexure A1) rejected the contention of the appellant that gypsum has the same chemistry as that of POP and thus, free from payment of tax. It was held that the gypsum has many uses. It can be used in plaster, cement, paints and ornamental stones. The intention of entry 16 is obvious, i.e., gypsum used only in relation to improvement of quality of soil is tax-free. POP is certainly not gypsum and not tax-free.

(3.) The appellant filed an appeal against the said order and the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for short, "the VAT Tribunal") vide its order dated September 14, 2009 remanded the case to the Excise and Taxation Commissioner to determine the rate of tax as if POP was not tax-free. The learned Excise and Taxation Commissioner vide its order dated March 22, 2010 returned a finding that POP is a building material, an unclassified entry, which attracts tax at 12.5 per cent. It is the said order, which was challenged before the VAT Tribunal. The VAT Tribunal affirmed the order passed by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner vide order dated November 8, 2010.