Immovable property test for factory machinery: integrated plant and equipment leased with land fell outside the tax net.

Plant and machinery installed in a ginning and pressing factory were treated as immovable property, not detachable goods, because the machinery was annexed to the earth for the permanent beneficial enjoyment of the factory premises. The court applied the settled test under the General Clauses Act and the Transfer of Property Act, focusing on the degree and mode of annexation, the purpose of attachment, and whether the equipment could be usefully operated apart from the land and building. As the lease deed covered the land, building, plant and machinery as an integrated establishment, the machinery fell outside the tax notification applicable to movable goods. The revision petitions failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether plant and machinery installed in a ginning and pressing factory and leased along with the land and building constituted immovable property or goods liable to tax under the notification.

Analysis: The expression "immovable property" was examined with reference to the General Clauses Act and the Transfer of Property Act. The decisive considerations were the degree and mode of annexation, the purpose of attachment, and whether the machinery was fastened to the earth for the permanent beneficial enjoyment of the land and factory. The lease deed showed that the entire factory premises, including land, building, plant and machinery, was leased as an integrated establishment, and the machinery could not be usefully operated apart from the land and building. Applying the settled principle that whether a chattel is movable or immovable depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, the machinery embedded in the factory was treated as attached to the earth and not as detachable goods.

Conclusion: Plant and machinery leased as part of the factory were immovable property and therefore outside the tax net as movable goods. The revision petitions failed.

---