TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (5) TMI 112
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by section 5 of the Act. 2.. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, reversing the decisions of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Sales Tax Officer, found in favour of the assessee that the assessment should be under section 5 of the Act. The department has filed these tax revision cases. 3.. As stated by the Tribunal, the commodity in question, the assessability to tax of which arises for consideration is stay-wire manufactured by the assessee. As stated by the Tribunal, again, this is a some sort of stranded wire manufactured by the assessee which is also sold by them. It does not appear to have been disputed by the assessee that this wire is used for giving support to electric post. It was contended by the assessee that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the goods in question. The question here is whether the stay-wires which are used for supporting electric posts can pass as "other accessories" within the meaning of the above entry. On a conspectus of the entry we think that what is regarded as accessory must be so in relation to the "electrical goods", and the primary and essential question would therefore be whether the electric posts can pass as "electrical goods" within the meaning of the entry. We should think, unaided by authorities or decisions, that as a matter of construction and in the light of our common knowledge and experience, it is difficult to regard electric posts as electrical goods within the meaning of the expression used in the entry and in accordance with the well-und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the only test. Before applying that test, the goods must be capable of classification as electrical goods. Though the words are easily understood in common parlance, it is one of those cases which are more easily understood than defined satisfactorily. Also, as pointed out by this court in William Jacks and Co. Ltd. v. State of Madras[1955] 6 S.T.C. 301., it is neither possible nor desirable to embark on a preparation of an exhaustive list of what constitute 'electrical goods' within the meaning of entry 41. But we are not satisfied that the Tribunal, in the view it took, was erroneous. In William Jacks and Co. Ltd. v. State of Madras[1960] 11 S.T.C. 340., this court held that a lathe fitted with electrical motor which could not be used e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the pointed ends of the rods in the process of welding, so that in the very process the copper rods gradually disappear. We do not say that this phenomenon by itself entirely contributes to testing whether electrodes by themselves are electrical goods. What we have in mind is that electrodes are but copper rods which are melted by electrical power in welding. Looked at from that point of view, it seems to us that welding electrodes are not by themselves electrical goods. That is the view the Tribunal has taken and, in any case, we are unable to say that it is incorrect." The same principle was accepted by the other decisions. We think this represents a correct approach to the consideration of the question and we are of the opinion that ....