Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (4) TMI 428

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tries is a registered dealer both under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. It applied under section 62 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 to the Deputy Commissioner for determination of the rate of tax payable on certain sales of P.V.C. wires and cables the details of which are to be found in annexure II of the paper book (and not in annexure A1 as stated in the question). Annexure II is the order dated May 31, 1980, passed by the Deputy Commissioner. The assessee had made two applications one in respect of eight sales and the other in respect of 25 sales. The Deputy Commissioner held that the P.V.C. wires and cables sold by the assessee were electrical goods falling under entry 41 of Schedule II, Part A to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f electric motors and the sales thereof would be covered by entry 16(2) of the Schedule to the Act and not by entry 41 of the Schedule dealing with electrical goods but with a view to avoid any complication it applied to the Deputy Commissioner for determination of the rate of tax payable on the sales of such articles. 5.. Before the Deputy Commissioner, it was contended by the assessee that the aforesaid wires and cables are used for the purpose of supplying electricity to electric motors and they have been adapted for that purpose and for that reason they should be regarded as accessories of electric motors. In support of his contention, the assessee had produced one certificate issued by Government run Shri A.V. Parekh Technical Instit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion of the electric cable is, therefore, in the nature of that of an essential commodity. The cables do not add to or contribute to the beauty or convenience or performance of electric motors; in their absence the electric motor cannot operate at all. We have, therefore, no hesitation to support and confirm the view taken by the learned Deputy Commissioner that the electric cables do not constitute accessories but are electric goods covered by entry 41 in Schedule II, Part A to the Act and are taxable as such. 7.. What is contended by the learned advocate for the assessee is that the Tribunal has narrowly construed the word accessory and erroneously applied the test of addition to beauty or convenience or performance and come to a wro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... motors. In our view, it was really necessary for the Tribunal to first record a finding on this point as in absence thereof, it cannot definitely be said whether they are accessories of electric motors or are electrical goods. 9.. Even though many decisions were cited before us, it is not necessary to refer to them as the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mehra Bros. v. Joint Commercial Tax Officer [1991] 80 STC 233 is the only decision which can be of help in deciding the question. Moreover some of those decisions have been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Mehra Bros. [1991] 80 STC 233. The Supreme Court, in that case, was concerned with an entry dealing with motor vehicles including motor cars, motor-taxi cabs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... use of the vehicle as a whole. General adaptability may be relevant but may not by itself be conclusive . It appears that the Tribunal mechanically applied this test without appreciating that the nature and function of the article with which the Supreme Court was concerned was quite different. Since it was concerned with car seat covers, the Supreme Court referred to the relevant aspect of adding to the beauty, elegance or comfort. What the Tribunal really missed is that an accompaniment or a thing which is connected with the principal thing can also be regarded as accessory, if it is made for the purpose of being used in that fashion and is adapted either specially or even generally for the principal article. If an article is important .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates