Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from Writ Petition No.57/2009, are as under: -

1. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.57/2009 Patanjali Foods Limited (Formerly known as Ruchi Soya Industries Limited) has been engaged in manufacturing and selling Soya Oil & De-oiled Cake (DOC).

The present matter relates to the period from 01-04-2004 to 31-03-2005. During the said period the petitioner brought a large quantity of crude soya oil by way of import from outside the country and after refining the same, some quantity of refined soya oil was sold outside the state of MP or was sold in the course of interstate trade or commerce without being used or consumed in the state. The assessment for the said period was completed by the learned Assessing Authority viz, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax Division-3, Indore vide order dated 31-01-2008. The petitioner contested in levying of Entry tax in the assessment proceedings, in respect of the oil brought within the state on the grounds that the process of refining on the ground that this process does not constitute a manufacture, as such the oil before and after refining remains the same commodity. It was further submitted by the petitioner that as such, there is neither any consumption nor use of the oil in any of the local areas of MP, as such, no entry tax on such oil entered in the state but sent outside the state is leviable. The assessing authority did not agree with the above contention of the petitioner and levied an entry tax on the oil transferred NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-IND:25409

-7- WP-57-2009 & 15 Ors.

out of the state of M.P. vide order dated 31-01-2008.

2. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a revision u/s 62 of the MPCT Act read with the relevant provision of the Entry Tax Act. Alternatively, the petitioner also challenged the levy of tax on the ground that in case, the refining of Soya crude oil is treated as a process of manufacture then even in such case, soya crude oil being Raw material would be exempted under Notification No. A-3-10-2000-ST-V(82) dated 06-09-2001.

3. The revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the impugned order dated 12-09-2008 confirming the levy of Entry tax. Hence these Writ Petitions.

4. According to the petitioner the revisional authority has not decided the principal issue of the charging of the Entry tax on consumption or use of soya crude oil to the extent of transfer or sale outside the state of M.P. in view of proviso (ii) to section 3(1) of Entry Tax Act because aliment of manufacturing is not being carried out by the petitioner. However, while rejecting the alternative submission of the petitioner regarding exemption under Notification No. 82 dated 06-09-2001, the revisional authority has specifically admitted that the process of refining crude oil does not constitute a process of the manufacturer in view of exclusion of said process from manufacture under Notification No. 18 dated 01-04-1995 issued by state government u/s 2(o) of MPCT Act, 1994. The present petition thus challenges the said revisional order and imposition of an entry tax on the entry of crude soya oil, which after refining was sold out of M.P.. The crude oil entered within the local area of the State of M.P. to the extent of sale of such oil after refining outside state of MP either by way of sale outside state or in the course of interstate trade or commerce in view of proviso (ii) to Section 3(1) of the Madhya Pradesh ke Sthaniya Kshetra Me Maal ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (MP Entity Tax Act for Short).

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-IND:25409

-24- WP-57-2009 & 15 Ors.

31. The case in hand, admittedly the petitioner brought Soyabean crude oil within the State and after the process manufactured the refined oil. According to the petitioner, the entry tax on oil entered into the State of M.P. and after refining sent to the outside State hence the entry tax is not leviable because there is neither any consumption nor use of oil. The petitioner claimed the non-liveability on the ground that the process of refining does not constitute the process of manufacturing oil because before and after refining it remains the same commodity. In the course of business, the petitioner purchased crude soya oil from other States and brought it within the State and after undergoing the process it became refined Soya oil, therefore, the authorities have rightly held that it was the raw product consumed and used in making refined Soya oil which is a saleable commodity. Refined soyabean oil is normally consumption in cooking the food which cannot be done from crude oil. The process of so- called refining has been explained in the aforesaid paragraphs with the help of the diagram clearly establishes that a big manufacturing plant is required to be installed for making Soyabean oil from crude Soya oil, therefore, the tax on entry of the goods into the local area has rightly been imposed for consumption/use or sale therein.