9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 925X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.e. Industrial Camera will fall in entry no. 16(1)A i.e. machinery. From the impugned order, it appears that the learned Tribunal has held against the revenue by observing that even State has accepted the goods in question is a printing machinery / machinery. It is required to be noted that as such it was an Industrial Camera. - Therefore, as per entry no.75 "Photographic and other cameras" shall fall within entry no.75. Under the circumstances, merely because the product in question was a machinery, the same cannot be considered in entry no. 16(1) of Schedule IIA as machinery, as such product in question is industrial Camera and as per entry no.75 (Photographic and other Camera) each included in entry no.75. Therefore, we are of the firm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the rate of tax payable on the sale of such cameras sold under the name of Kamm Vertical Industrial process camera complete film size 50 x 60 cm with one lens 150 mm copy board, Halogen lams, suction back vacuum fan . It was the case on behalf of the dealer that the aforesaid would fall under entry no. 16 (1) as Printing Machinery liable to be taxed accordingly. Considering the material on record, the Commissioner held that the aforesaid item would fall in entry no. 75 and liable to be taxed accordingly. On appeal, the learned Tribunal has held that the goods in question would fall in the entry 16(1) of Schedule IIA as machinery / printing machinery and not as Camera in entry no. 75. That at the instance of the revenue, present Reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowgule Co Pvt Ltd. and Ant vs. Union of India others reported in 47 (1981) STC 124 as well as decision of this Court in the case of Industrial Machinery Manufactures Pvt Ltd vs. The State of Gujarat reported in 16 (1965) STC 380. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has materially erred in not relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of M/s. Bhuj Product vs. The State of Gujarat reported in GSTB 1991 (HC) Vol II-396 which was with respect to xerox machine. Making above submissions and relying upon the above decisions, it is requested to answer the question in favour of the revenue and against the dealer. 4. Learned advocate has chosen to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a machinery, the same cannot be considered in entry no. 16(1) of Schedule IIA as machinery, as such product in question is industrial Camera and as per entry no.75 (Photographic and other Camera) each included in entry no.75. Therefore, we are of the firm opinion that product in question - Industrial Camera will fall within entry no.75 and was subjected to sales tax under the said entry no.75. 6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, Reference is answered in favour of revenue and against the dealer by holding that the product in question Industrial Camera would fall under the entry no.75 and not under entry no. 16(1) of Schedule IIA to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 as held by the learned Tribunal. With this, present R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
