THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. R. VENKATAREDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this revision petition challenging the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, which has held that L & T case 752 Vibratory Compactor is a "motor vehicle" and therefore not liable to tax under the provisions of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'K.T.E.G. Act').

(2.) The assessee is a Contractor engaged in the business of civil construction work and registered as a dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and also under the K.T.E.G. Act, 1979. In relation to the assessment year 2006-07, the Assessing Authority concluded the assessment under the Entry Tax Act and levied tax on the purchase of L & T 752 Vibratory Compactor (for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Compactor'). Against the said order of assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeals), Davanagere Division, Davanagere who dismissed the said appeal on the ground that the assessee has not produced any documents in support of his claim that the said compactor is a motor vehicle, is registered under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Aggrieved by the said orders, the assessee preferred a second appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for short, KAT). At the time of arguments, the assessee did not produce any evidence showing that the Compactor is registered under the Motor Vehicles Act but only produced the purchase bill. The KAT relying on the judgment of the Apex Court held that the Compactor is a "motor vehicle" and not a "machine" as contended by the Revenue and therefore, it is not liable to tax under the K.T.E.G. Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision petition is filed.

(3.) The learned Government Advocate assailing the impugned order contended that this Court in the case of M/s. L & T Case Equipments Private Limited vs. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in STRP No. 30/2010 and other connected matters decided on 10th August, 2012 and in the case of M/s. Ingersoll Rand (India) Limited vs. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in STRP Nos. 21/2010 and other connected matters decided on 10th August, 2012 has categorically held that the Vibratory Compactor is an earth moving machinery and therefore, it is not a motor vehicle. Ignoring the said judgments, the Tribunal committed serious error in holding it to the contrary. She also submitted that even till this date, the assessee has not produced the Certificate of Registration as a "Motor Vehicle" and therefore, it is not open to them to contend that it is not a machinery and a motor vehicle. Therefore, she submits that the impugned order requires to be set aside.