TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1976 (3) TMI 200
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2,761-4-9, which included, inter alia, an amount of Rs. 437-8-6, being the amount of general sales tax paid by the assessees on the purchase of certain electric meters, which were given by the assessees on rent to the consumers to whom the electricity produced by the assessees was supplied. It may be mentioned that the assessees were registered dealers under the said Act and were engaged in the generation and distribution of electricity. The claim of the assessees for set-off in respect of the said amount of Rs. 437-8-6 (hereinafter referred to as "the said amount") was disallowed by the sales tax authorities on the ground that such a set-off was not admissible under rule 11(2)(c) of the Bombay Sales Tax (Exemptions, Set-off and Composition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Division Bench of this Court consisting of Kotval, C.J., and V.S. Desai, J., by an order dated 31st August, 1967, directed the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and raise and refer to this court for its determination three questions of law, which are as follows: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in holding that the meters were used by the respondents in the manufacture or processing of electrical energy for sale? (2) Whether, on a true and proper construction of the provisions contained in clause (c) of sub-rule (2) of rule 11 of the Bombay Sales Tax (Exemptions, Set-off and Composition) Rules, 1954, and, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has er....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t when the references would come before it for hearing. In this connection, we may point out that the provisions of section 34(3) of the said Act clearly provide that if the High Court is not satisfied that the refusal of the Tribunal to refer a question of law was justified, it may require the Tribunal to state a case and refer it to the High Court and on receipt of such requisition the Tribunal shall state and refer the case accordingly. A plain reading of this provision should have enabled the members of the Tribunal to realise that once this court had directed them to state a case and to refer certain questions of law to this court, the Tribunal was bound to do so, and the refusal of the Tribunal to do this is nothing other than judicia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ials, processing materials, machinery, tools, plant, equipment, fuel, lubricants, containers or packing materials in the manufacture or processing of any goods for sale." It is common ground that the electric meters, which are the goods in question, are not such goods as would be covered by entries 1 to 18 of Schedule B to the said Act. There can be little doubt, and it is in fact not disputed before us, that electric meters must certainly be considered as machinery or tools or equipment. It is common ground that electricity must be considered to be goods for the purposes of the sales tax legislation in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board[1970] 25 S.T.C. 188 (S.C.)., ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o which it has arrived. We find that some support for the view which we are taking can be derived from the decision of the Supreme Court in Indian Copper Corporation Ltd. v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes[1965] 16 S.T.C. 259 (S.C.). The assessees in that case mined copper and iron ore from its own mines, transported the ore to its factory and manufactured finished products from the ore for sale. The question was whether certain goods including locomotives and motor-vehicles should be specified under section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Rule 13 of the Rules framed under section 13 of the Central Sales Tax Act reads as follows: "The goods referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 8, which a registere....