STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SOHANLAL LAKSHMINARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessment years are 1965-66 and 1966-67. The dealer (opposite party) deals in sugarcane crushers. The Sales Tax Officer and the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax held that sugarcane crushers constitute machinery and as such are exigible to sales tax at 7 per cent as per entry No. 60 of taxable goods. The Tribunal in second appeal held that sugarcane crusher should not be treated as machinery. Three small iron rollers fixed close to one another to crush sugarcane are operated not through power but are driven by animals. The mechanism is known as sugarcane crusher. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that sugarcane crushers do not constitute machinery and are liable to tax at 5 per cent. The extra demand of 2 per cent was accordingly reduced. Aggrieved by this order, the Commissioner of Sales Tax (petitioner) asked for a reference which was rejected on 28th March, 1972. The petitioner approached the High Court for a reference. This court called for a statement of the case. The Tribunal has made a reference of the following question :

(2.) THE sole question for consideration is whether sugarcane crushers come within the definition of "machinery" within the ambit of entry No. 60 of the taxable list which runs thus :

(3.) IN Corporation of Calcutta v. The Chairman of the Cossipore and Chitpore Municipality (A.I.R. 1922 P.C. 27), their Lordships had to examine the meaning of this expression under section 101 of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1884. The relevant provision was as follows :