Setback to Triveni Glass Ltd: Supreme Court upholds levy of Sales Tax on tinted glass sheets as “goods or wares made of glass” [Read Order]

The Supreme Court has recently decided the matter of levy of sales tax on tinted glass sheets as ‘goods or wares made of glass’ against the assessee, Triveni Glass Ltd. The Supreme Court was in consideration of the question whether "tinted glass sheets" produced by Triveni Glass Ltd should be subject to taxation as "goods or wares made of glass" according to Entry No. IV of Notification No. 5784 dated 07.09.1981, or whether they should be categorized as unclassified items. Several appeals had been filed, all revolving around this common legal question. Notably, Civil Appeal No. 3773 of 2011 relates to tax assessment years 1996-97, while Civil Appeal No. 5914 of 2023 pertains to notice of re-assessment for the tax assessment years 1992-93 to 1996-97. Furthermore, Civil Appeal Nos. 5965-66 of 2023 concern the tax assessment years 1998-99 and 2003-04, respectively. The appellant, involved in the manufacturing and sale of various types of glass, including tinted glass, colored glass, and sheet glass, has faced scrutiny during tax assessment. The assessing officer differentiated tinted glass production from sheet glass manufacturing based on their distinct manufacturing processes and properties As a result of this differentiation, the assessing officer levied a 15% tax on the sale of tinted glass, categorizing it under "all goods and wares made of glass" as per the mentioned notification. Appeals challenging this taxation were dismissed, including subsequent challenges before the Trade Tax Tribunal and the High Court. The appellant's counsel, S.K. Bagaria contended that tinted glass is essentially the same as plain glass, differing only in color, and therefore should attract a 10% tax, not the 15% claimed by the revenue. The counsel cited various judgments to support this argument. On the other hand, R.K. Raizada, senior counsel appearing for the respondent state, supported the orders passed by the authorities and the High Court and prayed for dismissal of the appeals. The Apex Court observed that, “When the assessee is contending that an item/product falls under the residuary category, necessarily the burden is on the assessee to prove the said fact and in the instant case, the business premises of the appellant was inspected by Special Investigation Branch of the Department and it was revealed that “tinted glass sheet” was being manufactured through a different process.” It was also noted by the Two-Judge Bench that, “In this background, when the contention of Mr. Bagaria, learned senior counsel, appearing for the appellant contending that “plain glass panes” would include ‘tinted glass sheet’ is examined, same has to be rejected as the general meaning of “glassware” could not have been attached to ‘tinted glass’ sheet or the exclusion would have been specific in Entry (IV) itself. In our considered opinion, the expression “all the goods and wares made of glass” occurring in Notification dated:07.09.1981 must be taken to refer to all articles of glass except those specifically excluded in the entry itself.” Further, it was observed that, “In the aforesaid background, we are of the considered view that neither the dictionary meaning nor the common parlance theory would come to the rescue of the appellant. The arguments canvassed by the learned senior counsel with regard to flat transparent sheet glass as indicated in the Indian Standards Specification has also received the attention of the High Court and has been dealt with under the impugned order and distinguished it on facts in favour of the revenue, and rightly so, for the reasons indicated thereunder which we are of the considered view is in tune with the settled principles of law noted hereinabove and thereby impugned order does not call for our interference. “ It was thus held by the Bench of Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar that, "we are of the considered view that the impugned judgments would not call for interference and accordingly the appeals are dismissed.” Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates