9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (1) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984. This matter was initially a reference made to this Court prior to the above amendment for deciding the following questions of law: (1) Whether, on a proper interpretation of entry No. 8 of Notification No. F. 5(16) FD(CT)/69-2 dated 8th March, 1969, the Commercial Taxes Officer was justified in bifurcating the sale of tractors into that of tractor and other part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the tractor as a whole and not of these items separately. In other words, these items were shown as parts of the tractor, which were sold as a single unit. The question for decision by the assessing authority was, whether the sales tax was exigible at the rate of 2 per cent only in accordance with the entry No. 8 reading "tractors and spare parts thereof", or at the rate of 7 per cent according t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the above questions. Having heard both the sides, I am satisfied that this revision has to be allowed. The question really is, whether the aforesaid entry No. 8 providing for the tax at 2 per cent on transactions of sale of "tractors and spare parts thereof" is wide enough to cover the transactions in the present case. There is no other competing entry relied on by the department, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quire any distinction to be drawn between parts of a tractor and its accessories. Obviously, the residuary entry has to be resorted to only if it is not possible to bring the transaction within any of the specific entries, or in other words entry No. 8 in the present case, which is the only specific entry for this purpose. The nature of transaction also indicates that the contract was for sale of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... department in the present case. From the result of the aforesaid discussion it follows that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that sales tax was chargeable at the rate of 7 per cent in accordance with the residuary entry No. 79 instead of at the rate of 2 per cent according to the aforesaid entry No. 8. The revision is allowed accordingly. In the circumstances of the case, the parties sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
