TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (2) TMI 518
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion to the usual functions of a cash register, the respondent's models perform various other functions including: (i) billing and cash memo printing with alpha numeric print out, (ii) cashier-wise cash collection summary and analysis, (iii) daily and periodical item-wise analysis, (iv) stock analysis, (v) re-order level analysis, (vi) salesman-wise sales analysis, etc. 2.. The question is whether such cash registers are classifiable under entry 90 or under entry 97(b) of Part II, Schedule C of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. 3.. The two competing entries read as follows: Entry 90. "Tabulating, calculating, cash registering, indexing, card punching, franking, addressing, cheque writing, statistical, paper shreddin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t 'electronic cash register' sold by the applicant was covered by entry No. 90 of Schedule C, Part II and not by entry No. 97(b) of Schedule C, Part II appended to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. 2.. Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the various functions carried on by the machine were only subsidiary functions and that, therefore, the cash register was essentially only a cash register and could not be considered as an electronic system, appliance or instrument." 6.. The High Court answered the questions framed in favour of the assessee. Contrary to the opinion expressed by the Tribunal, the High Court was of the view that entry 90 was the general entry and entry 97(b) t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar kinds of cash registering machines. It is significant that by contrast, data processing machines have expressly excluded computers. Were it not so excluded, computers would have also fallen within entry 90. In fact computers are separately dealt with in entry 97(a). But the exclusion of computers from data processing machines would indicate that the items mentioned in entry 90 are generic covering all species of such items. Given the language of the two entries we fail to understand how the High Court could have come to the conclusion that entry 97(b) was the specific entry and that entry 90 was the general entry. Such an interpretation goes against the express language of the two entries. 8.. There is an additional telling factor. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inds of weighing machines. On the other hand it contended that it should be classified under entry 90 which does not explicitly refer to weighing machines as it does to cash registers. The assessee contended that the machine was classifiable under entry 97(b). In this context, the Tribunal was of the view that there was reasonable doubt whether the machine fell under entry 90 or under entry 97(b) and giving the benefit of doubt to the assessee, the machine was held to be classifiable under entry 97(b). The case has no relevance to the facts before us. 11.. The last decision relied upon by the respondent in support of its stand was the decision of this Court in BPL Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh See [2001] 121 STC 450. (2001) 2....