9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 805X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how (for short, "TKH"), in the capital investment in fixed assets, for the purpose of grant of eligibility certificate to claim deferment in payment of commercial tax under the Madhya Pradesh (Deferment of Payment of Tax) Rules, 1986 (annexure P/5) (for short, "the Deferment Rules") read with State Government Notification No. A-31-92-ST-V(56) dated March 31, 1992 (annexure P/7) issued under section 12(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and as amended by a subsequent Notification No. A-5-1-92-ST-II(68) dated August 16, 1993 (annexure P/8), so as to include within its ambit exemption from commercial tax payable under the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1995. 2.. The petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner's claim for inclusion of the said amount of fees was disallowed by the Committee. The appeals filed by the petitioner before the State Level Committee and the State Appellate Forum were also disallowed (vide orders, annexures P/16 and P/18). All the three authorities were concurrently of the view that the amount so spent was not an "investment in fixed assets" within the meaning of the Deferment Rules. 4.. I have heard Shri G.M. Chafekar, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Shri S.S. Samvatsar for the petitioner and Shri D.D. Vyas, learned Additional Advocate-General appearing with Shri S. Mukati, Government Advocate, for the respondents. 5.. Under the Deferment Rules read with notification dated March 31, 1992, defermen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the business". Reliance was also placed on a Supreme Court decision in Scientific Engineering House P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh [1986] 157 ITR 86, wherein it was held that for the purpose of section 43(3) of the I.T. Act the TKH in the shape of drawing, designs, chart sheet, etc., falls within the definition of "plant". As against it, Shri D.D. Vyas, learned Additional AdvocateGeneral, contended that the word "plant" used under the Deferment Rules cannot be assigned such a wide meaning as is assigned to it under section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act. The expression "fixed assets" used under these Rules narrows down its meaning and so, only the assets of permanent nature acquired by an industrial unit would form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r's Encyclopaedic Unabridged in the English Language (new revised edition) "plant" means: the equipment including the affixtures, machinery, tools, etc., and often the buildings, necessary to carry on any industrial business, manufacturing plant, the complete equipment or apparatus for a particular mechanical process or operation. 9.. It will be thus seen that the word "plant" in its general or even in technical sense would mean the building, equipments and machinery used in carrying on manufacturing or production unit. The context in which this word has been used and the object of the Deferment Rules also do not admit any wider meaning of the word "plant". On the contrary, they suggest for narrower meaning. This word "plant" has been use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the word plant given in that Act and, therefore, not of universal application. Obviously, if plant is defined differently under a different provision or if the context so requires, it may have to be given a different and a narrower meaning. The Deferment Rules do not define plant and, therefore, what should have been considered by the High Court was what meaning should be given to it in the context of the Deferment Rules." Their Lordships of the Supreme Court then considered the context in which the word "plant" was used and the object behind the said Rules and held: "The context in which the word 'plant' is used in rule 2(v) of the Bihar Sales Tax Supplementary (Deferment of Tax) Rules, 1990, indicates that it is not used in its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s used for storing the manufacturing product. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also led emphasis on this aspect of the case and contended that the case in hand is distinguishable on its own facts. I am however not persuaded by the argument. It is seldom that facts of two cases are similar. What is important is the ratio decidendi of a particular decision and which alone is binding. The decision in Steel City Beverages Ltd. [1999] 112 STC 185 (SC), lays down the principle of construction as to how the word "plant" occurring in a particular rule or notification is to be construed. The ratio of that decision is relevant and applies with full force, in the present case. The question as extracted above thus, deserves to be answered against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
