| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1975 SLG 368 1975 SLD 368 (1975) 31 TAX 14 1975 PTD 14 |
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
S.T.A. Nos. 130,131 and 132 of 1973-74 (Assessment years 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72), decision dated: 27-9-1974.
M. T. SIDDIQUI, PRESIDENT AND M. M. AKBAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
S. M. Raza Naqvi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Fakhirul Islam, D.R., for the
Respondent
S.T.A. Nos. 130,131 and 132 of 1973-74 (Assessment years 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72), decision dated: 27-9-1974.
M. T. SIDDIQUI, PRESIDENT AND M. M. AKBAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
S. M. Raza Naqvi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Fakhirul Islam, D.R., for the
Respondent
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law:
Section:
Sales-tax Act, 1951 -- Section 7 -- Exemption -- Assessee claiming exemption -- Whether onus lies on him to establish that exemption is covered by the relevant provisions without any doubt or ambiguity -- Held yes -- Ice cream -- "Milk and cream" in any form exempt from sales tax -- Ice cream, whether "Milk and cream" per se and exempt from sales tax -- Held no -- Notification (Sales Tax) No. 7 dated 27-6-1951, as amended by Notification No. S.R.O. 475(K)/65, dated 14-6-1965, item 22 - ORDER The order was passed by M. T. SIDDIQUI, President.-- These three sales tax appeals by a manufacturer of ice candy and ice cream question the Sales Tax Officer's action in taxing the sales of ice cream estimates in the three years under consideration to the extent of Rs. 20, 000, Rs. 22, 000 and Rs. 22, 000. 2. Before the Sales Tax Officer, the appellant had claimed this exemption under Notification No. 475(K)/65, dated 14th June, 1965 by contending that ice cream was nothing but milk and cream fully sweetened and produced in some solid form. The Sales Tax Officer, however, did not accept this position and in consequence the exemption claimed was rejected. 3. Before us the appellant's learned counsel again sought to place reliance on the same Notification as also item 22 of the Notification No. 7, dated 27th June, 1951, It was vehemently contended that the term "ice-cream" in the Reader's Digest Great Encyclopedia is defined as "Flavored and sweetened cream or custard or some substitute of this frozen in a refrigerator or by any other process." It was stated that item 20 of Notification No. 9 dated 27th June, 1951 the ice cream served in hotels was granted exemption and, therefore, there is no reason why the ice cream sold by the appellant should be treated differently. The appellant's learned counsel thereafter gave us the ingredients of the ice cream produced, by contending that it contains 55% milk, 25% cream, 4% powder and flavors etc. and 16% sugar. Therefore, the entire product is nothing but milk and cream sweetened in some solid form. In any case it was argued that it was nothing but milk and cream concentrated and sweetened and, therefore exempt under both the above…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492