TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (1) TMI 331
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Schedule C and not falling under entry 19A(c) of Schedule E or entry 22 of Schedule E of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959?" 2.. The assessee is a partnership firm. It carries on the business of manufacture of PVC goods. During the period April 1, 1980 to March 31, 1981, the assessee manufactured and sold "PVC scooter and car covers". The turnover of such sales during the above period amounted to Rs. 2,228. The assessee showed the sales of these goods as sales of goods falling under the residuary entry 22 of Schedule E to the Act (as it stood at the material time) and paid sales tax at the rate of five paise in the rupee, which was applicable to sales of such goods. The Sales Tax Officer did not agree with the assessee, as he was of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted out that we are concerned in the present case with the original Schedules A to E as they stood before their substitution by the existing Schedules A to C by Maharashtra Act 32 of 1981 with effect from July 1, 1981. Entry 58 of the original Schedule C, at the material time, read as follows: "58. (1) Motor vehicles including motor cars, motor taxi-cabs, motor cycles, motor cycle combinations, motor scooters, motorettes, motor omnibuses, motor vans and motor lorries and chassis of motor vehicles but excluding tractors, whether on wheels or tracts. (2) Components and spare parts of motor vehicles specified in sub-entry (1) of this entry and other articles (including rubber and other tyres and tubes and batteries) adapted for us....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Sales Tax v. L.D. Bhave and Sons [1981] 47 STC 318. The controversy in that case was whether gas stands, designed specially for keeping gas stoves and sold along with gas stoves by a dealer who deals in gas stoves, can be considered to be accessories of gas stoves. This Court held that such stands were additional items required for use along with the gas stoves, and hence were accessories of gas stoves. In Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Jayesh (India) Agencies [1984] 57 STC 128, this Court was required to answer the question whether car seat covers were accessories to the motor car. It was observed: "............The only question is whether such articles could be regarded as accessories of motor vehicles. In this regard, it is clear tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ortable use of the motor vehicle or for adding elegance to the seat, could be regarded as "accessories" of motor vehicles. 7.. In the above decision, the Supreme Court also considered the decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Commissioner, Sales Tax v. Free India Cycle Industries [1970] 26 STC 428 and Shadi Cycle Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1971] 27 STC 56 and the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Supreme Motors v. State of Karnataka [1983] 54 STC 308, where it was held that an article intended to serve as an aid to a part of a vehicle or a cycle could not be regarded as accessory thereof and that in order to be an "accessory" of a motor car, scooter or cycle, it must serve as an aid to the motor car, scooter or cyc....