2003 (3) TMI 680 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues Involved:
1. Taxability classification of diesel engine pumping sets.
2. Interpretation of relevant notifications and amendments.
3. Binding nature of conflicting Supreme Court judgments.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Taxability Classification of Diesel Engine Pumping Sets:
The primary issue was whether diesel engine pumping sets should be taxed as "power-driven agricultural implements" or as "machinery." The Assessing Authority initially levied an 8% tax on these pumping sets, categorizing them as machinery under Notification No. ST-II-6627/X612-1972 dated December 1, 1973. The Tribunal, however, held that diesel engine pumping sets were agricultural implements, thus subject to a 6% tax rate. This decision was based on a previous Tribunal judgment which deemed water pumps and diesel pumping sets as distinct commodities, with the latter being agricultural implements.

2. Interpretation of Relevant Notifications and Amendments:
The Standing Counsel argued that the Supreme Court, in the case of Engineering Traders v. State of Uttar Pradesh, had reversed the Full Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court, which had initially classified pumping sets as agricultural implements. This reversal was due to amendments in the relevant notifications by the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1975, which excluded "water pumps" from the category of agricultural implements and included them under machinery. The Tribunal's reliance on its earlier decision was challenged on the grounds that the retrospective amendments had not been considered.

3. Binding Nature of Conflicting Supreme Court Judgments:
The Senior Advocate for the respondent contended that the Tribunal's decision for the assessment year 1978-79, which classified diesel engine pumping sets as agricultural implements, had become final as no revisions were filed against it. He further argued that the later Supreme Court judgment in the case of Sterling Machine Tools v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., decided on August 7, 1996, which treated pumping sets and water pumps as different items, should be binding. This judgment overruled earlier decisions, including the one in Engineering Traders, by distinguishing between water pumps and pumping sets.

Analysis of Notifications and Amendments:
The court examined various notifications and amendments:
- Pre-1975 Amendment: Agricultural implements excluded those worked by human or animal power.
- Post-1975 Amendment: Excluded water pumps from agricultural implements and included them in machinery.
- 1981 Amendment: Specifically excluded pumping sets from agricultural implements and included them in machinery.

The Tribunal had held diesel engine pumping sets as agricultural implements based on the distinction between water pumps and pumping sets, which was not considered in earlier judgments. The court noted that the retrospective amendment by Act No. 38 of 1975 only excluded water pumps, not pumping sets, from agricultural implements. This distinction was upheld in the later Supreme Court judgment in Sterling Machine Tools.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the diesel engine pumping sets were to be taxed as agricultural implements up to September 6, 1981, and as machinery from September 7, 1981, onwards due to the specific exclusion and inclusion in the respective categories by the 1981 amendments.

Final Judgment:
- Revision No. 1735 of 1990 (1979-80): Dismissed.
- Revision No. 1736 of 1990 (1980-81): Dismissed.
- Revision No. 1737 of 1990 (1981-82): Partly allowed. Diesel engine pumping sets up to September 6, 1981, to be taxed as agricultural implements, and from September 7, 1981, to March 31, 1982, to be taxed as machinery.

The Tribunal was directed to pass necessary orders under section 11(8) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

← Previous Next →