IT Act | Ambiguity in statutory notices undermines the principles of natural justice: Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeals Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction Under NDPS Act: Procedural Lapses Insufficient to Overturn Case Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Points to Possible Suicide Pact in "Tragic Love Affair" Tampering With Historical Documents To Support A Caste Claim Strikes At The Root Of Public Trust And Cannot Be Tolerated: Bombay High Court Offense Impacts Society as a Whole: Madras High Court Denies Bail in Cyber Harassment Case Custody disputes must be resolved in appropriate forums, and courts cannot intervene beyond legal frameworks in the guise of habeas corpus jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Insubordination Is A Contagious Malady In Any Employment And More So In Public Service : Karnataka High Court imposes Rs. 10,000 fine on Tribunal staff for frivolous petition A Show Cause Notice Issued Without Jurisdiction Cannot Withstand Judicial Scrutiny: AP High Court Sets Aside Rs. 75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand Timely Action is Key: P&H HC Upholds Lawful Retirement at 58 for Class-III Employees Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Not Applicable to Civil Court Orders: Patna High Court Uttarakhand High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown, Acknowledges Cruelty Due to Prolonged Separation Prosecution Must Prove Common Object For An Unlawful Assembly - Conviction Cannot Rest On Assumptions: Telangana High Court Limitation | Litigants Cannot Entirely Blame Advocates for Procedural Delays: Supreme Court Family's Criminal Past Cannot Dictate Passport Eligibility: Madhya Pradesh High Court Double Presumption of Innocence Bolsters Acquittal When Evidence Falls Short: Calcutta High Court Upholds Essential Commodities Act TIP Not Mandatory if Witness Testimony  Credible - Recovery of Weapon Not Essential for Conviction Under Section 397 IPC: Delhi High Court University’s Failure to Amend Statutes for EWS Reservation Renders Advertisement Unsustainable: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Quashes EWS Reservation in University Recruitment Process Seniority Must Be Calculated From the Date of Initial Appointment, Not Regularization: Madras High Court Rules Section 319 Cr.P.C. | Mere Association Not Enough for Criminal Liability: Karnataka HC Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds ₹25,000 Per Kanal Compensation for Land Acquired for Nangal-Talwara Railway Line, Dismisses Railway’s Appeal No Work No Pay Principle Not Applicable: Orissa High Court Orders Reinstatement and Full Back Wages for Wrongfully Terminated Lecturer No Assault, No Obstruction, Only Words Exchanged: Bombay High Court Quashes Charges of Obstruction Against Advocates Under Section 353 IPC Matrimonial Offences Can Be Quashed Even if Non-Compoundable, When Genuine Compromise Is Reached: J&K HC Plaintiff Entitled to Partition, But Must Contribute Redemption Share to Defendant: Delhi High Court Clarifies Subrogation Rights in Mortgage Redemption Labeling Someone A 'Rowdy' Without Convictions Infringes Personal Liberty And Reputation: Kerala High Court

Refining Crude Soybean Oil is a Use of Goods Within the State, Attracting Entry Tax: Madhya Pradesh High Court

28 September 2024 1:32 PM

By: sayum


Madhya Pradesh High Court, in Prakash Soya Ltd. v. State of M.P. & Ors., ruled in favor of the state, upholding the levy of entry tax on crude soybean oil brought into the state for refining. The court rejected the argument that refining crude oil does not constitute "use" or "consumption" under the Madhya Pradesh Entry Tax Act, 1976.

Prakash Soya Ltd., a company involved in importing crude soybean oil and refining it into edible oil, challenged the imposition of entry tax by the Madhya Pradesh tax authorities. The company contended that the refining process did not amount to manufacturing, and thus the crude oil was not "used" or "consumed" within the state, exempting it from entry tax under Section 3(1)(ii) of the Entry Tax Act.

The petitioners relied on various Supreme Court judgments, asserting that no new commodity emerged from the refining process and that no entry tax should be levied on goods that were exported after refinement.

The central issue before the court was whether refining crude soybean oil constitutes "use" or "consumption" for the purposes of imposing entry tax. The petitioners argued that crude oil remains the same commodity after refining, and thus the process does not amount to consumption or use.

However, the court disagreed, holding that the refining process transforms crude oil into a consumable product—refined soybean oil—which is sold in the market. It noted that even though refining does not amount to "manufacturing" under the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994, it constitutes "use" under the Entry Tax Act.

Justice Vivek Rusia, in his ruling, emphasized that the transformation of crude oil into refined soybean oil through processes like degumming, deacidification, and deodorization, resulted in a marketable product distinct from crude oil. The court further explained that for purposes of entry tax, "use" includes any process that results in a commercially viable product. Therefore, the crude oil was indeed "used" within the state, making it subject to entry tax.

The court also upheld the orders of the revisional authority, concluding that no grounds existed to interfere with the levy of tax.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s ruling clarifies that refining crude oil qualifies as a taxable use of goods under the Entry Tax Act. This decision reinforces the state's authority to levy entry tax on goods brought into the state for processing and later sold elsewhere.

Date of Decision: September 23, 2024

Prakash Soya Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.​.

 

Similar News