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

2010 (8) TMI 818

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s absolutely no scope to hold Desk Top Projector is a cinematographic equipment or it is used in movie theatres for exhibiting regular cinemas in order to hold that the said projector would fall under Entry 33 of Part D of the First Schedule. We, for all the above stated reasons, do not find any scope to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Revision failed.
F. M. Ibrahim Kalifulla And M. M. Sundresh,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Haja Naziruddin Spl. Govt. Pleader (Taxes) For the Respondent : Mr. K. J. Chandran ORDER (Order of the Court was made by F. M. Ibrahim Kalifulla) The State is the petitioner. The challenge is to the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 15.02.2001 in T.A.No.1140 of 1999. 2. The short question .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d other electronic goods and parts and accessories of all such goods." 5. The respondent/assessee is a dealer in sales of cinematographic goods as well as electronic goods. As part of its selling activity, it was marketing Desk Top Projectors manufactured by General Engineering and its spares manufacturers. The Desk Top Projector is an electronically operated equipment, which consists of liquid crystal display panel mounted in a box. It has computer compatibility of IBM PC. It is used as a monitor output device. 6. The literature of the Desk Top Projector discloses that there were four different models with minor variations as between each models. The common feature of Desk Top Projector is stated to be a multimedia equipment, which .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r point presentations in boardrooms, educational institutions, class rooms for training and other alleged purposes, it will have to be held that it cannot be brought under the category of cinematographic equipments, which entry specifically states that that would include a projector also. 10. Once we steer clear of the said position and when Entry 44 specifically mentions and contains Projector as part of the said entry, but as an independent item, there can be no difficulty in holding that the Desk Top Projector, which is not a Projector falling under the inclusive definition of cinematographic equipments, will certainly fall under the said entry, viz., Entry 44 of Part B of the First Schedule. 11. The difference between "Entry 33 o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... expression "including" used in Entry 33 is not found in Entry 44. Such a specific mention of the expression "including" in Entry 33 would make all the difference in respect of the 'projector' connected with cinematography and a 'projector' unconnected to cinematography. Therefore, such a wide distinction as between the two entries, makes it clear that the projector, which has nothing to do with cinematography, would clearly fall only under Entry 44 of Part B of the First Schedule. 13. With the above perspective about the product, when we examine the orders of the Assessing Authority, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and that of the Tribunal, we find that the Assessing Authority by rejecting the conte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Tribunal a clarificatory letter of the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, dated 22.03.1999, wherein it was clarified that the portable LCD Computer Multimedia Projector would fall under Entry 58 of Part D of the First Schedule, which was in existence in the year 1997. The said Entry 58 was the relevant Entry 44 as it existed in the assessment year 1995-1996. 16. The Tribunal has noted that the Desk Top Projector is also the multimedia equipment comparable to a Portable LCD Computer Multimedia Projector. Therefore, the clarification issued by the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes mutatis mutandis would apply to a Desk Top Projector. Thus, we find that the Appellate Tribunal had considered .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... try viz., Entry 14 of Part F of the First Schedule, the Division Bench rejected the stand of the assessee in that case holding that the said equipment should still be brought under the entry relating to electronic items. On the other hand, in the said decision, the Division Bench has made it clear that it is settled proposition that in interpreting items in statutes whose primary object is to raise revenue and for which purpose classification of diverse products have been made, resort should be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of the terms or expressions used, but to their popular meaning, that is to say, the meaning attached to them by those dealing in them. 20. Applying the said principle to the case on hand both going by .....

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