https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155887 Cycle locks were treated in trade and by the department as bicycle accessories, and their dominant use was confined to bicycles. Applying common parlance and predominant function, the court held that they remained classifiable under the bicycle accessory entry rather than a later general entry for all kinds of padlocks and locks. The mere existence of a broader lock entry did not displace the specific accessory classification, because cycle locks were not equivalent to ordinary general-purpose locks. Entry 14 of the Second Schedule therefore applied, and entry 150 did not. en-us Thu, 22 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Sep 2013 18:29:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155887 Cycle locks were treated in trade and by the department as bicycle accessories, and their dominant use was confined to bicycles. Applying common parlance and predominant function, the court held that they remained classifiable under the bicycle accessory entry rather than a later general entry for all kinds of padlocks and locks. The mere existence of a broader lock entry did not displace the specific accessory classification, because cycle locks were not equivalent to ordinary general-purpose locks. Entry 14 of the Second Schedule therefore applied, and entry 150 did not. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 22 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155887