Judgment:
Ashutosh Mohunta, J.
1. The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the `PVAT Act 2005') challenging the impugned order dated 6.10.2006 (Annexure A-6) passed by the VAT Tribunal, Punjab.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of Diagnostic film and Medical X-ray films. It is the case of the appellant that on the sale of the aforementioned Diagnostic film and Medical X-ray films it is charging 4% VAT being medical equipments and devices for all intends and purposes. According to the appellant, the aforementioned items fall under Sr. No. 31 of Schedule-B of PVAT Act, 2005. The items falling under Sr. No. 31 of Schedule-B of PVAT Act, 2005 are reproduced as under:
-------------------------------------------------------S. No. Name of the Commodity-------------------------------------------------------31 Drugs and medicines including vaccines,syringes and dressing, medicated ointmentsproduced under drug license, light liquidparaffin of IP grade, medicalequipment/devices and implants.-------------------------------------------------------
3. The appellant filed an application under Section 85 of the Punjab VAT Act seeking determination of the question 'Whether goods diagnostic films and medical X-ray films fall under item No. 31 of Schedule-B of PVAT Act, 2005?' The Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Punjab, vide order Annexure A-4 held that the Diagnostic films and X-ray films are not covered under item 31 of Schedule-B appended to PVAT Act, 2005 as these are neither medical equipments/devices nor implants and, hence, these are taxable @ 12.5% and not @ 4%. The appellants filed an appeal before the VAT Tribunal, Punjab, which is also dismissed vide Order (Annexure P-6).
4. The question of law which has been raised before this Court is 'Whether the goods Diagnostic film and Medical X-ray film fall under item 31 of Schedule-B and therefore taxable @ 4%'
5. Learned Counsel has submitted that the Diagnostic films and medical X-ray films would be covered by the word 'Devices' as mentioned in item 31 and, hence, would be taxable @ 4%. Counsel for the appellant has referred to the dictionary meaning of the word 'Device' as is appearing in the Oxford Dictionary which is as under:
1 apparatus, appliance, contraption, contrivance, gadget, implement, instrument, invention, machine, tool, utensil. 2 dodge, expedient, gambit, gimmick, manoeuvre, plan, ploy, ruse, scheme, stratagem, stunt, tactic, trick, wile. 3 badge, design, figure, logo, motif, sign, symbol, token.
6. It is further contended that the items are associated with tax in common parlance. It is contended that the word 'Device' means something invented and constructed for a special purpose and as both the Diagnostic films and X-ray films are meant for special purposes, hence, the same would be covered by the word 'Device' and as such the aforementioned items being purchased and sold by the appellant would be fully covered under items at Sr. No 31 of Schedule-B of the PVAT Act, 2005.
7. On the other hand, counsel for the State has argued that by no stretch of imagination the Diagnostic films and X-ray films being sold by the appellants can be said to be covered by items at Sr. No. 31 of Schedule-B of PVAT Act, 2005. Learned Counsel has further referred to Schedule-C of Bengal VAT Act wherein a list of goods liable to tax @ 4% has been given against entry No. 90. X-ray films and other Diagnostic films have been given under the Schedule and brought under tax @ 4%. Item at Sr. No. 48 of the same Schedule reads as 'medical equipments, devices and implants'. It is submitted that as there are two separate independent entries in Schedule-C of the Bengal VAT Act, it clearly shows that X-ray films and Diagnostic films are not covered under entry 48 (medical equipments, devices and implants).
8. We have heard the counsel for the parties at length.
9. A perusal of Schedule-C of the Bengal VAT Act clearly shows that against entry No. 90, X-ray films and other diagnostic films have been included and are liable to tax @ 4% whereas item 48 of the same Schedule reads as 'medical equipment, devices and implants'. Hence, it is clear that there are two separate independent entries in Schedule-C of the Bengal VAT Act. If medical equipments, devices and implants were to be covered against entry No. 90, then there was no point in making another independent item No. 48 of the same Schedule. This clearly shows that there was a conscious decision by the State of Bengal to provide separate entries for X-ray films and other diagnostic films on the one hand and medical equipments, devices and implants on the other hand. It is, thus, clear that the X-ray films and diagnostic films being purchased and sold by the appellants are not covered under items at Sr. No. 31 of Schedule-B of the PVAT Act, 2005. By no stretch of imagination the same can be included under the word 'device' as mentioned under items at Sr. No. 31 of Schedule-B of PVAT Act, 2005.
10. For the foregoing reasons, it is held that the goods diagnostic films and medical X-ray films would not fall under items at Sr. No. 31 of Schedule-B of PVAT Act, 2005 and, hence, would not be taxable @4% but the same would be taxable at the rate of 12.5%.
11. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the Punjab VAT Tribunal and, accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.