9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (3) TMI 224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on identical facts and, therefore, it is enough to consider the facts of one year and to apply the conclusion arrived at therein for the other. In making the assessment on the assessee for the assessment year 1966-67, the assessing authority taxed the sales of drawing office equipment amounting to Rs. 83,633.75 at 61 per cent. Later on, he found that this equipment had to be treated as duplicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rated by electricity. The rotation of the sensitised paper and the specimen around the light for the required length of time completes the operation and the facsimile of the specimen is obtained on the sensitised paper. However, the usage of the equipment is subject to certain limitations. For getting clear and correct facsimile of the specimen, the specimen should be typed or printed on a trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat, therefore, it came within the scope of entry 41 of Schedule I to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. Entry 41 reads as follows: "SI. No. Description of the Point of levy Rate of tax goods Per cent 41 All kinds of electrical At the point of 9." goods (other than those first sale in the specified elsewhere in this State. schedule), including wires, holders, plugs, switches, casings, c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Tribunal had come to a different conclusion. Except for the figures, the rest of the facts are common. In the present tax revision cases the contention of the revenue was that this is a duplicating machine as it performs and is intended only for duplicating purposes. For the assessee the submission was that this is a printing and developing machine, as is shown by the pamphlet published by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duplicating machines have been specified. In the circumstances, we consider that the assessing authority was right in taxing these goods as duplicating machines. In the result, Tax Revision Case No. 310 of 1971 is allowed and Tax Revision Case No. 316 of 1971 is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs in both the revisions. Tax Revision Case No. 310 of 1971 allowed. Tax Revision Cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
