https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157113 Flap was held to be a commercially distinct article used inside a tyre, but not an essential component of a motor vehicle and not an accessory to tyres and tubes. The applicable test for an accessory required the article to be an adjunct, accompaniment, addition or supplementary item, and mere utility or improved use was insufficient. Because the rate chart specified tyres and tubes but omitted flaps, the omission showed no intention to tax flaps at the same rate as those goods. In the absence of a specific entry, flap fell within the residual category of unspecified goods and attracted the residual rate applicable for the relevant years. en-us Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:30:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157113 Flap was held to be a commercially distinct article used inside a tyre, but not an essential component of a motor vehicle and not an accessory to tyres and tubes. The applicable test for an accessory required the article to be an adjunct, accompaniment, addition or supplementary item, and mere utility or improved use was insufficient. Because the rate chart specified tyres and tubes but omitted flaps, the omission showed no intention to tax flaps at the same rate as those goods. In the absence of a specific entry, flap fell within the residual category of unspecified goods and attracted the residual rate applicable for the relevant years. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157113