1996 (9) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : Lajja Ram, Member (T)]. - In this appeal filed by M/s. TISCO, the short point for our consideration is, whether the goods such as pick axes, beaters, powrah/hoe/spade, shovels and crow-bras etc. which are not exclusively used for agricultural purposes, but are capable of use in other activities, civil construction etc. are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 55/75-C.E.,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itra, Advocate, appeared for the appellants. Shri M. Jayaraman, JDR, represented the respondents/Revenue. 3. Shri Ravinder Narain, Advocate, stated that the Revenue had admitted that the goods in question were used for agricultural purposes, but had denied the exemption only on the ground that they were capable of other uses also. He submitted that as the predominant use of the goods is for ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../75-C.E., aforesaid. 6. As the Revenue had admitted that they were used for agricultural purposes, the exemption in our opinion could not be denied only on the ground that they were not exclusively usable for agricultural purposes. 7. In the case of Engineering Traders v. The State of Uttar Pradesh - 1973 (STC) 31 at Page 456, the full Bench of the Allahabad High Court had observed as ....