T3 , 2008 (224 )ELT365 (S.C. ), 2008 INSC 282 , JT2008 (3 )SC 508 , 2008 (4 )SCALE27 , (2008 )4 SCC548 , [2008 ]3 SCR678 , (2008 )15 VST559 (SC ), ,MANU/SC/7350/2008S.H. Kapadia#B. Sudershan Reddy#239SC2020Judgment/OrderADJ#CLT#ELT#INSC#JT#MANU#SCALE#SCC#SCR#VSTS.H. Kapadia,Auto#AutoSUPREME COURT OF INDIA2012-9-24General principles of strict construction,Strict Construction of Taxing Statutes,Construction of Taxing Statutes and Evasion of Statutes,Interpretation of Statutes97494,97550,97527,40527,21650,21649,97493 -->

MANU/SC/7350/2008

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 1709 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8789/07) and Civil Appeal No. 1710 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9259/07)

Decided On: 03.03.2008

Appellants: Moriroku UT India (P) Ltd. Vs. Respondent: State of U.P. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.H. Kapadia and B. Sudershan Reddy

JUDGMENT

S.H. Kapadia, J.

1. Leave granted in both the special leave petitions.

Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 8789/07:
[Moriroku UT India (P) Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Ors.]

2. This civil appeal filed by M/s Moriroku UT India (P) Ltd. is directed against judgment dated 6.4.2007 delivered by Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in CWP (Tax) No. 13/04 by which, the writ petition filed by the appellant herein, seeking to restrain the AO from imposing any tax on moulds (toolings) supplied by its customer, Honda Siel Cars India Ltd., free of cost was sought to be taxed under Section 3 of U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, stood dismissed.

3. Appellant is the company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a manufacturer of plastic automobile components. Appellant is manufacturing such components for use in the Honda Siel Cars manufactured in India by Honda Siel Cars Ltd. (hereinafter called the "customer"), as per designs and specifications given by it. The customer supplies tools, dies, moulds etc. (toolings) free of cost to the appellant herein to enable it to manufacture automobile components.

4. For the assessment year 2000-2001, a final assessment order was passed on 29.10.2002 under the provisions of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 ("1948 Act"). Thereafter, a notice under Section 21 was issued by the AO for reassessment to which the appellant submitted its reply. By the said Notice, the appellant was called upon to show cause why amortisation cost in respect of toolings and moulds should not be taxed under Section 3 of the 1948 Act.

5. Vide reassessment order dated 30.9.2003, tax was imposed on the amortisation cost on the ground that the sale price of the auto components should be the same both for the purposes of Central Excise Act, 1944 ("1944 Act") and for 1948 Act.

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred by the appellant-assessee under Section 9 of the 1948 Act, which was rejected in the light of the circular dated June, 2003 issued by the Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. by which amortisation co........