Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
21 judgments · newest first · showing 1–21
The Rajasthan government issued Notification S.O.377 on 9 March 2007, exempting VAT on asbestos cement sheets and bricks containing at least 25% fly ash, provided the dealer began commercial production in the state by 31‑December‑2006 and the exemption lasted until 23‑January‑2010 (later extended). …
The Supreme Court examined whether a credit note issued by an automobile manufacturer to a dealer, for replacing a defective part under a warranty, constitutes a sale liable to sales tax. It held that when the dealer uses a part from his own stock or purchases it from the market and is reimbursed by …
The Supreme Court examined whether Ultratech Cement Ltd. was entitled to a 75% capital investment subsidy under the Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme, 2003 (RIPS-2003) for its Kotputli cement plant. The Court held that the scheme’s sub‑clauses (vi) and (vii) granting 75% subsidy were deleted …
M/s Universal Cylinders Ltd., a manufacturer of LPG cylinders, supplied cylinders to government-owned oil companies at a provisional price of Rs.682 per unit as per a purchase order that stipulated the final price would be fixed by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoP&NG). The MoP&NG later …
The Commercial Taxes Officer appealed against A Infrastructure Ltd's claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on raw material used to manufacture asbestos cement sheets. The assessing authority had disallowed the ITC, contending that the final product was exempted under Notification S.O. 377/2007, and …
M/S Mamta Surgical Cotton Industries, a dealer under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, purchased raw cotton and processed it into surgical cotton. The assessing authority taxed the surgical cotton at 4% for AY 1992-93, treating it as a separate commodity, and the Rajasthan Tax Board upheld this view for …
The Rajasthan Sales Tax Assessing Officer had assessed M/s Makkad Plastic Agencies at a 10% rate, which was later set aside by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and then restored by the Rajasthan Taxation Board. The assessee filed a rectification application under Section 37 of the Rajasthan Sales …
The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department appealed to the Supreme Court after the Rajasthan High Court dismissed a tax revision petition in a cryptic order that contained no reasons. The appellant argued that the lack of reasons violated principles of natural justice, legitimate …
The Department intercepted a vehicle carrying paint buckets whose ST‑18A declaration form was left completely blank, and imposed a penalty under s.78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 for an alleged intent to evade tax. The penalty was set aside by the appellate authority and the State Tax …
The Rajasthan Commercial Tax Department assessed a higher sales tax rate of 12% on "ballies" sold by M/s Rijhumal Jeevandas, treating them as timber, while the normal rate for goods was 8%. The assessee appealed and the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and the Rajasthan Tax Board held that ballies are …
The Department (Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer) appealed against a High Court order that set aside a penalty imposed on M/s. Bajaj Electricals Ltd for transporting goods with a blank but signed Declaration Form ST 18A/18C. The vehicle was intercepted on 30‑03‑1999; the form lacked material …
M/s Deepak Agro Foods, a dealer under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, challenged assessment orders for the years 1995-96 and 1996-97 on the ground that they were anti‑dated, passed after the limitation period and were therefore null and void. The Rajasthan High Court set aside those orders and remanded …
The appellant, an exhibitor of cinematograph films, was found to have admitted 878 school children without tickets and was penalised under Section 10 of the Rajasthan Entertainment and Advertisement Tax Act, 1957. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty of Rs.500 per viewer, totalling Rs.4,39,000, …
The case concerned several civil appeals arising from the imposition of penalty under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (in pari materia with Section 22A(7) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954) for carrying goods in movement with blank Form ST‑18A/18C that had been signed but left …
Mis. Amtek India Ltd. purchased plant and machinery and was assessed a penalty under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 on the ground that the invoice and delivery challan dates did not match, leading the Assessing Officer to deem the documents non‑genuine. The assessee successfully …
M/S Kumar Motors, Bareilly purchased auto‑rickshaw chassis and bodies separately and assembled them before sale. The issue was whether this assembly amounted to "manufacture" under Section 2(e‑1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 and consequently attracted purchase tax under Section 3‑AAAA despite the …
Rajasthan TaxChem Ltd, a manufacturer of polyester yarn, purchased diesel to run generator sets that supplied electricity for its production process and claimed a concessional sales‑tax rate of 3% under Section 10(1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. The assessing authority held that diesel was …
Vishnu Metals, a manufacturer of stainless steel sheets, expanded its installed capacity and claimed a sales‑tax exemption under the Rajasthan Sales Tax New Incentive Scheme, 1989, on the ground that its total production—including job‑work performed for others—had increased by more than 25% of the …
The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 4A of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, which levied tax on the first point sale of drugs, medicines and formulations by wholesalers to retailers based on the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) printed on the package rather than the actual …
The Rajasthan government introduced a Sales Tax Exemption Scheme for industries under its Fourth Industrial Policy, classifying cement units under different categories. Two sick cement manufacturers applied for exemption claiming parity with new units, but while their applications were pending the …
The Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 requires transporters to carry declaration Form ST‑18A and other documents under Section 78(2). A truck of Mis D.P. Metals was stopped at a check‑post without the form, seized and a penalty of 30% of the goods' value was imposed under Section 78(5). The respondents …
