9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (12) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal"). The Tribunal reversed the decision of the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax and, accepting the contention of the assessee, held that the domestic flour mills (without in-built electric motor) sold by the assessee were covered by entry 16(1) of Schedule II-Part A and not by entry 92 of Schedule II-Part A. The revenue thereupon moved the Tribunal to state a case in respect of the, question of law arising out of the decision and, accordingly, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the domestic flour mill (without electric motor fitted to it) sold by the opponent is covered by entry 92 of Schedule II-Part A to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, as held by the learned Deputy Commissioner or entry 16(1) of Schedule 11-Part A to the said Act as contended by the opponent?" The two entries with which we are concerned herein may be first set out: "16. (1) Machinery used in the Three paise Three paise manufacture of goods exin the rupee. in the rupee." cluding machinery specified in any other entry in this or any o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of darkness and supply of fluorescent light through the fluorescent tube, then a fluorescent tube without a starter and a choke cannot fall within entry 52 of Schedule B. The real test which requires to be applied in determining the question as to whether an article can be said to be an appliance, therefore, is the utility of such article to serve the object for which it is produced. In order that an appliance could be properly termed an electrical appliance, it is necessary that it should be fitted with some electrical device. In Special Civil Application No. 1251 of 1972, which was heard with two other matters, this Court had an occasion to consider whether domestic grinding mills or flour mills, manufactured by the petitioners in that case, with no inbuilt electric motor, attracted duty under entry 33C of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Under the entry in question, "domestic electrical appliances, not elsewhere specified" were liable to duty at the rate of 25 per cent ad valorem. In the course of its decision rendered in the said matter on 18th December, 1974, this Court considered the entry along with its explanations and exemption notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ical appliance. Without the electrical device, it may at the highest be termed as a mere assemblage of articles which is designed to serve as a domestic appliance. This is precisely the view taken by the Tribunal in respect of the flour mills manufactured and sold by the assessee and we see no reason to differ from the same. In our opinion, therefore, the Tribunal rightly held that the domestic flour mills manufactured and sold by the assessee are not covered by entry 92 of Schedule II-Part A. The next question is whether such domestic flour mills are "machinery used in the manufacture of goods". The said expression takes in two concepts, namely, (1) that there must be an article which can be properly called "machinery " and (2) that such machinery must have a use in the manufacture of goods, that is to say, it must play some role in the entire integrated process carried on by the manufacturer for converting raw materials into finished goods. The controversy has centred round only one question, namely, whether the domestic flour mills manufactured and sold by the assessee without electric motors can be properly called "machinery". That raises the question as to what is the true ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lordships think that however skilful definitions of 'machinery' may be framed, the determination in any given case of what is or is not 'machinery' must, to a large extent, depend upon the special facts of that case." Applying the test evolved as aforesaid, the Judicial Committee in that case came to the conclusion that the supporting structure of the tank, which merely served to give the tank elevation so that the water which was allowed to escape from it may have a fall, and the tank itself which was no more than a receptacle into which water was poured and remained stationary and escaped through hole or holes in its side into pipes only by the force of gravity which was not a force that was generated, modified, directed or applied to the tank, cannot properly be called "machinery". *Here italicised. We cannot venture to undertake the exercise, which even the Judicial Committee has not thought it fit to embark upon, to precisely define the term "machinery" in such a manner as to be applicable to all cases irrespective of the facts and circumstances of each case. For the purposes of this case, we will only emphasise some of the aspects which have been brought into sharp focus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (4) the movement should be with a view to do some specific activity or to obtain specific or definite result." This definition also emphasises that an article in order that it could be properly styled as machinery should be a complete and integrated collection of several objects or articles which must interact in unison upon or with each other by application of force with the end in view of doing some specific activity or producing some specific result. The question, which must then be considered is whether the domestic flour mills (without in-built electric motor) manufactured and sold by the assessee satisfy the aforesaid test. Be it noted at this stage that entry 16(1) uses the word "machinery" by itself and not in conjunction with the words "spare parts" and/or "accessories thereof". Therefore, for an article to fall within the coverage of the said entry, it must solely satisfy the test of machinery. It is not sufficient that it is merely an accessory or spare part of machinery. While dealing with the question as to whether the flour mills in question are machinery, the Tribunal in paragraph 8 of its order referred to the decision of the High Court of Mysore in D.B. Bhandari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on then is as to what course should be adopted so far as answer to the alternative question is concerned, namely, whether the domestic flour mills in question are "machinery" within the meaning of entry 16(1) of Schedule II-Part A. It appears to us that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the best course for us to adopt would be to decline to answer the alternative question and to leave it to the Tribunal to adjust its decision under section 69(4) in accordance with the observations made herein. If, instead of following that procedure, we call upon the Tribunal, to send a supplementary statement of the case, the Tribunal will be confined to the material on record and it will not be open to it to take into consideration additional evidence, if any, on the point which the parties might like to lead. Under such circumstances, following the precedent in the cases of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Indian Molasses Co. P. Ltd.[1970] 78 I.T.R. 474 (S.C.). and Lakshmi Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax[1970] 26 S.T.C. 263 (S.C.)., we decline to answer the question as to the applicability of entry 16(1) of Schedule IIPart A. It is true that the question herein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
