2026-VIL-1173-PAT
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1173-PAT

VAT High Court Cases

Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 – Taxability of Mobile charger sold as part of composite pack with cellular phone under single MRP - Appellant sold cellular phones and chargers in composite packs under a single label and single MRP and discharged tax at the rate applicable to cellular phones - Assessing Authority treated the charger as an independent accessory taxable at the residual rate and created a differential tax liability on a notional value ascribed to the charger by best judgment - Tribunal following the Supreme Court decision in Nokia India case on mobile chargers - Appellant contended that the decision is distinguishable as the dealer there itself treated the charger as an accessory - Whether the Tribunal was justified in applying the Supreme Court decision to levy differential tax on chargers sold in a composite pack - HELD - The Supreme Court held that a mobile charger is an accessory and not a part of the cellphone, that it is an independent product which can be sold separately, and that merely making a composite package of cellphone and charger does not make it a composite good for the purpose of interpreting the Schedule entry - The Supreme Court was fully conscious that the charger was sold in a composite pack and nevertheless held that it retained its character as an independent accessory. Exclusive compatibility, warranty conditions and a single declared MRP are commercial attributes which do not alter the basic nature of the goods. The sale of standalone chargers by the Appellant at the residual rate reinforces that the charger is a distinct commercial commodity. Once the charger is held to be a separate taxable commodity, the residual entry is attracted and the absence of a separate machinery provision for splitting does not nullify the classification. Valuation by best judgment is a question of fact, and no material showed that the notional value was arbitrary or perverse - The decisions of other High Courts turned on differently worded Schedule entries and cannot be pressed into service against binding precedent - The mobile charger sold as part of a composite pack remains an accessory taxable at the residual rate - The finding of the Tribunal upholding the levy of differential tax on mobile chargers sold as part of composite packs with cellular phones, by applying the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in, and the coordinate Bench decision of this Court, is affirmed - The challenge to this finding is rejected - The appeals are dismissed - Classification of toner and cartridges - Entries 3 and 4 of Part II of Schedule III - Entry 97 excluding toner and cartridge from printing ink - Residual entry - Assessing Authority treated toner and cartridges as unspecified goods taxable at the residual rate, which was affirmed by the First Appellate Authority and the Tribunal - Whether toner and cartridges are classifiable under Entries 3 and 4 as computer peripherals and their parts and accessories, or fall under the residual entry - HELD - Entry 97 specifically deals with printing ink excluding toner and cartridge. The express exclusion is a clear legislative pointer, since if the legislature had intended these goods to fall under the IT-products entries it would have been unnecessary to carve them out of the printing-ink entry and leave them to the residual entry. The exclusion is not otiose and shows that toner and cartridges were deliberately kept outside the lower-rate entries. By the functional test and common parlance, toner and cartridges are consumables which are periodically exhausted and replaced and do not form a permanent or integral component of the printer. The analogy with paper, without which a printer cannot produce output, and with fuel, without which a vehicle cannot run, is apposite, as neither is treated as a part or accessory of the machine - A taxing statute is construed strictly, and where the Schedule itself contains an express exclusion and the goods answer the description of consumables, the residual entry is rightly attracted - Toner and cartridges do not fall under Entries 3 and 4 of Part II of Schedule III and are liable to tax at the residual rate. The finding of the Tribunal is affirmed - Remand by Tribunal of issues of trade discount, entry-tax set-off, D-IX reconciliation and interest - Vague show cause notice - Appellant sought clarification of the governing principles on the remanded issues and contended that the show cause notice was vague and reflected a premeditated mindset, and that the orders were non-speaking and ignored the written submissions and authorities cited - Whether any substantial question of law survives on the remanded issues and whether the procedural complaints warrant interference - HELD - The Tribunal correctly observed that a genuine post-sale discount is not a taxable event but that its factual foundation must be verified. It gave a clear exposition that entry-tax set-off is available only when VAT liability is actually incurred on the sale of the imported scheduled goods, with the credit for closing stock to be examined in the succeeding year against the opening stock. It rightly deprecated the use of pure presumptions on D-IX declarations and directed verification against the books of account, tax being imposable only if actual suppression or misuse is established. Interest under Section 39(4) is fastened when any of the specified conditions is satisfied and does not require a separate finding of wilful default. The Tribunal's rejection of the contention that the amount collected is tax-inclusive discloses no error. Since all these issues stand remanded with adequate guidance, no substantial question of law survives at this stage - As regards the procedural complaints, the Appellant fully participated in the assessment and appellate proceedings, filed replies and produced documents, no prejudice was demonstrated, and participation without protest weakens the challenge to the show cause notice - The challenge based on natural justice and non-speaking orders is rejected, the Assessing Authority shall re-examine the remanded issues after giving the Appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing and recompute the liability.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST & Customs updates: Sep'26
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?