Commercial parlance test for agricultural machinery: tractors were held outside the entry because their primary use was not agriculture.

Tractors were held not to fall within the expression "agricultural machinery" in entry No. 9 of Schedule B of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 because mere capability of use in agriculture is insufficient. The article must be understood in commercial parlance as agricultural machinery and its general or principal use must be for agriculture. On the material before the Tribunal, tractors were used for a wide range of non-agricultural purposes, and the sales were not shown to be exclusively to agriculturists, so the goods were correctly assessed under the residuary entry No. 80.

---

---

Issues: Whether tractors sold by the dealer fell within entry No. 9 of Schedule B of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 as agricultural machinery, or were taxable under the residuary entry No. 80.

Analysis: The expression "agricultural machinery" was held not to cover every machine capable of use in agriculture. The dealer had to show that the article was understood in the commercial world as agricultural machinery and that its general or principal use was for agriculture. On the material before the Tribunal, tractors were used for a wide range of non-agricultural purposes, and their primary and predominant use was not agriculture. The finding that the sales were not exclusively to agriculturists also supported the conclusion that the goods did not answer the description in entry No. 9.

Conclusion: Tractors were not agricultural machinery within entry No. 9 and their sale was correctly assessed under entry No. 80, against the dealer.

Ratio Decidendi: An article falls within a descriptive tariff entry only if, in commercial parlance, it is generally and primarily understood as answering that description; mere capability of use for the relevant purpose is insufficient.

---