State of Jharkhand and others Vs Linde India limited and another (Supreme Court)

Court: Supreme Court of India
Head Notes:

State of Jharkhand and others Vs Linde India limited and another (Supreme Court)
Date- 2nd December, 2022
Sub-Whether oxygen which is used in the production of steel can be said to be a raw material and thus eligible for concessional rate of tax @ 1% instead of normal rate of 3% under the Bihar Finance Act.

An interesting issue arose in this case where Linde India Limited claimed that the oxygen which is supplied by it to Tata Steel limited for production of steel is a raw material and is thus eligible for the concessional rate of tax @ 1% which was applicable in respect of a raw material. As against this the department on the basis of the report of an expert committee which was constituted in pursuance of 1st round of litigation which travelled upto Supreme Court, contended that the oxygen was only a refining agent and not a raw material and thus the concessional rate was not applicable. The Supreme Court while hitting hard on the high court for having entertained writ petition even though the expert committee had given a finding that the oxygen was not a direct raw material, allowed the SLP of the State by holding that the oxygen was not a raw material for production of the steel. While holding so that the court dealt with the process of production of steel and also distinguished judgements cited by Senior Advocate Mr S Ganesh who appeared on behalf of the Respondents.

This judgement will be of help in dealing with similar issues in the context of GST

Ramesh Patodia
04-12-2022

Law:
Section(s): Bihar Finance Act
Counsel(s): Counsels
Dowload Pdf File Click here to download the file in pdf format
Uploaded By Ramesh Patodia
Date of upload: December 4, 2022
One comment on “State of Jharkhand and others Vs Linde India limited and another (Supreme Court)
  1. Adv Vijay Gupta says:

    The expert committee commented that Oxygen is not a direct material. It though duly noted that it is used in the manufacturing process. The Expert committee didn’t either deal with the legal dicta put forth in ‘Ballarpur’ case by the Hon’ble SC – based upon importance and indispensability aspects. Neither the SC in this ruling dealt with this. Probably, it can’t be a guiding case for future disputes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*