Supreme Court: "Goods" in UP VAT Act (Sec. 2(m) and Sec. 13(1)(f)) covers taxable and exempted items.

Last Updated: 16-11-2023 11:13:50pm
Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant judicial pronouncement, has elucidated the expansive scope of the term "Goods" as delineated under Section 2(m) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 ("UP VAT Act"). The verdict, delivered by a bench headed by Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, brings clarity to the interpretation of crucial provisions within the state's tax legislation.

The essence of the ruling revolves around the inclusive nature of the definition of "Goods" encapsulated in Section 2(m) of the UP VAT Act. The Court affirmed that this definition encompasses not only taxable goods but also extends to goods that fall within the realm of exemptions. In essence, the statutory interpretation is now aligned with a broader understanding, recognizing the diverse nature of goods subject to value-added taxation in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

Section 2(m) of the UP VAT Act serves as the cornerstone for determining the ambit of goods liable to taxation under the legislative framework. By explicitly stating that the definition includes both taxable and exempted goods, the Supreme Court has effectively quashed any potential narrow interpretation that may have sought to limit the applicability of the term solely to taxable items. This expansive interpretation is crucial in maintaining a fair and inclusive tax regime, ensuring that a wide range of goods, whether subject to tax or falling under exemptions, are appropriately accounted for within the statutory framework.

Furthermore, the judicial pronouncement addressed the interpretation of the term "goods" as utilized in Section 13(1)(f) of the UP VAT Act. The Court emphasized that the term "goods" in this context should not be construed as being qualified or restricted by the adjective "taxable." In other words, the legislative intent behind Section 13(1)(f) is such that it encompasses all types of goods, irrespective of their taxable or exempted status. This interpretation aligns with the broader legislative intent of creating a comprehensive and inclusive taxation structure.

The decision underscores the importance of adopting a purposive and contextual approach to statutory interpretation. Rather than confining the interpretation of statutory provisions within rigid and narrow parameters, the Court has emphasized the need to consider the legislative intent and the overall scheme of the statute. This interpretative approach ensures that the law is applied in a manner that aligns with the underlying objectives of the legislation, promoting fairness and equity in the taxation system.

Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, leading the bench, played a pivotal role in providing legal clarity on this matter. His jurisprudential insight and commitment to a nuanced understanding of legislative provisions have contributed to a precedent that will guide future interpretations within the domain of taxation law in Uttar Pradesh.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's ruling on the definition of "Goods" under Sections 2(m) and 13(1)(f) of the UP VAT Act signifies a significant development in tax jurisprudence. The decision upholds a broad and inclusive interpretation of the term "Goods," ensuring that both taxable and exempted goods are appropriately considered within the ambit of the state's value-added tax regime. This judicial pronouncement not only resolves a specific legal issue but also establishes a precedent that underscores the importance of a purposive and contextual approach to statutory interpretation in the realm of taxation law.





TAGS: Goods definition ,Section 2(m) ,Section 13(1)(f) ,Legal clarity ,Precedent

Latest Posts

Calcutta HC extends police shield for slain Congress worker's family amid threats from accused in poll violence.

Calcutta HC extends police shi...

 Madras HC: S.194 CrPC Orders Administrative, Unquestionable Unless Clearly Illegal.

Madras HC: S.194 CrPC Orders ...

 Delhi HC: No summons for non-compliance with Section 31 DV Act maintenance order.

Delhi HC: No summons for non-...

 Bombay HC nullified reassessment on leasehold rights, alleging income escapement.

Bombay HC nullified reassessm...

 2023 Supreme Court Digest: Indian Penal Code.

2023 Supreme Court Digest: In...

 Bail not granted solely on innocence claim; serious charges require stronger reasons: Supreme Court.

Bail not granted solely on in...

 Rajasthan HC queries police on contempt for breaching Supreme Court rules on commercial arrests

Rajasthan HC queries police o...

J&K High Court: Denying benefits to similar employees violates Articles 14 & 16, equality and non-discrimination.

J&K High Court: Denying benefi...