TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (7) TMI 403
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which arose for consideration in these two appeals before the Tribunal was whether "plastic straps" are taxable as "plastic articles" under entry 113 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, or as "general goods" under section 5(1) of the Act. The Tribunal held, applying the functional test, that they cannot be treated as "plastic articles" and, therefore, must be taxed as "general goods". T.R.C. No. 59 of 1985 arises from Tribunal Appeal No. 213 of 1983, and the question in this tax revision case is whether "plastic rope", "plastic packing strips", and "synthetic yarn" must be taxed as "plastic articles " under entry 113 of the First Schedule, or should they be taxed as "general goods" under section 5(1) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; The State challenges the opinion and conclusion of the Tribunal in respect of all the three goods in these tax revision cases. It could not, however, be ascertained whether the decision of the Tribunal dated March 31, 1982 in T.A. No. 959 of 1979, etc., has been the subject-matter of any tax revision case in this Court, and if so, what was the result? We shall, therefore, proceed to consider the matter on merits. We shall first take up for consideration "plastic packing strips" or "plastic straps", as they are called. These goods are common to all the three tax revision cases before us. It is a plastic strap meant for packing goods. It serves the same purpose as is served by cotton/silk strap/ribbon, and country twine made of jute, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecent decision of the Supreme Court in Atul Glass Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1986] 63 STC 322-a case arising under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944-where, the learned counsel says, applying the functional test, it was held that mirrors and wind screens, rear screens, and door screens manufactured for motor vehicles, do not and cannot fall within the entry "glass or glasswares", within the meaning of item 23A(4) of Schedule I to the Central Excises and Salt Act. It was held that while "glass mirrors" fall within the residuary item, i.e., item 68, wind screens, rear screens and door screens manufactured from sheet glass for fitting in motor vehicles must be treated as motor vehicle parts, and they fell under it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c article" within the meaning of entry 113. If we go on applying the functional test, there will be no article made of plastic left to fall under entry 113, because every article made of plastic has some or other functional use or utility, as it may be called. The Tribunal has opined that goods like plastic tubs, plastic balls, and plastic pen-stands, etc., would fall within "plastic articles", but not plastic strap/strip. We are at a loss to understand the distinction. Each of the three articles mentioned by the Tribunal as falling under "plastic articles" has also a function or utility. Just as plastic strap is a strap used for packing, plastic tub is a tub used for bathing or storing water. Plastic balls also are balls, and plastic pen-s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s v. Ganga Setty AIR 1963 SC 1319). No doubt that was a decision under the Sea Customs Act, 1878, but the ratio of the decision applies equally to the classification of goods under the Sales Tax Act as well. A Constitution Bench of the court observed: "It is primarily for the Import Control authorities to determine the head or entry under which any particular commodity fell; but that if, in doing so, these authorities adopted a construction which no reasonable person could adopt, i.e., if the construction was perverse, then it was a case in which the court was competent to interfere. In other words, if there were two constructions which an entry could reasonably bear, and one of them which was in favour of Revenue was adopted, the Court ....