COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX Vs. JAYESH INDIA AGENCIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (referred to hereinafter as "the said Act"), wherein an interesting question as to the interpretation of the entry 58(2) of the Schedule C to the said Act as it stood at the relevant time, is involved. The reference is made at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State. The question referred to us for determination in the reference is as follows :

(2.) The relevant facts are as follows : The respondents were the dealers registered under the said Act. The respondents carried on the business of making rexine seat covers and rexine covers for doors, centre pillars, etc., of motor vehicles according to the measurements of the customer's motor vehicles. In the course of the said business, the respondents made certain seat covers and covers for 4 doors, 2 centre pillars, 2 cowl pads, 1 rear glass shelf, according to the measurements of a Fiat car of one of the respondents' customers. These articles are more particularly described in the respondents' Bill No. 6644 dated 16th January, 1973, under which the said articles were sold to the said customer by the respondents. By their application dated 22nd January, 1973, made to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, the respondents requested the Deputy Commissioner to determine the rate of tax payable on the aforesaid sale of the said articles effected under the aforesaid bill. It was contended by the respondents that the said articles were covered under the residuary entry 22 of the Schedule E to the said Act. A copy of the said bill was enclosed with the letter. The said application was transferred to the file of the Commissioner of Sales Tax. After hearing the respondents, the Commissioner held that the said articles fell under entry 58(2) of Schedule C of the said Act on the ground that they were adapted for use as parts of motor vehicles, and therefore, were liable to the levy of sales tax at 12 per cent under section 8 of the said Act. On the respondents' appeal to the Tribunal, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and held that the said articles described in the said bill were covered by entry 22 of Schedule E of the said Act and not by entry 58(2) of Schedule C. The correctness of this decision of the Tribunal is sought to be challenged in this reference.

(3.) Before dealing with the contentions of the parties, it will be useful to refer to the material provisions of the said Act as they stood at the relevant time. Section 8 of the said Act deals with the levy of sales tax on the goods described in Schedule C. Column No. 1 of Schedule C contains the serial numbers. Column No. 2 contains the description of the goods. Column No. 3 prescribes the rate of sales tax on the goods in question and Column No. 4 prescribes the rate of purchase tax. The description of the goods set out in Column No. 2 of entry 58 of Schedule C at the relevant time which read thus :