COMMISSIONER TRADE TAX Vs. MODI XEROX LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These six revisions under Section 11 of U.P Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 02.03.1995 relating to the assessment years 1989-90, 88-89 (Central), 88-89 (U.P.), 90-91, 89-90 respectively.

(2.) Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as "Dealer" was Public Limited Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Rampur. Dealer had established a new unit for the manufacture of xerographic equipment and system. Dealer was granted eligibility certificate under Section 4-A of the Act being a new unit. The eligibility certificate 'was granted for xerographic equipment and system for the period of six years from 01.01.1985. Dealer was claiming the exemption from 26.05.1985 for the period of six years. Review application was also rejected. Dealer filed Writ Petition No. 1 1936 of 1990, which was allowed vide order dated 19.12.1990 and it was held that the dealer was entitled for exemption from 26.05.1985 for the period of six years. It is informed that against the order of writ petition, Special Leave Petition has been dismissed. In pursuance of the order passed in the writ petition, eligibility certificate was modified and the exemption was granted from 26.05.1985 for the period of six years. Dealer further started manufacturing of loner and Developer and for which the eligibility certificate was issued in respect of Toner w.e.f. 01.01.1986 and in respect of Developer from 19.03.1987. It appears that alongwith Xerographic machine, dealer had also provided one installation kit to its customers, which consisted of Photo-receptor, Toner, Developer and Fuser oil and also provided Cutter and Stand. Apart from the price of the Xerographic machine, dealer had separately charged for the installation kit and for Cutler and Stand. Assessing authority had not levied the tax on the turn over of Photo-receptor, Toner and Developer because they have been manufactured and dealer was holding eligibility certificate in respect thereof but so far as Fuser oil, Cutter and Stand are concerned, dealer was not the manufacturer and they were purchased from outside the State of U.P. and, therefore, on the turn over of Fuser oil, Cutter and Stand tax was levied by the assessing authority while passing the assessment order both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and under the Central Sales Tax Act. Claim of the dealer was that Fuser oil. Cutler and Stand were part and parcel of the "Xerographic machine and system," therefore, they were also eligible for exemption. However, assessing authority had not accepted the plea of the dealer and levied the tax on the aforesaid three items. First appeals filed by the dealer were rejected. Second appeals, filed by the dealer were allowed by the Tribunal Tribunal accepted the plea of the dealer and deleted the tax assessed on the turn over of Fuser oil, Cutter and Stand. Tribunal held that Fuser oil, Cutter and Stand are part ami parcel of the Xerographic machine and system, therefore, not liable to tax.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.