1995 (1) TMI 336

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....are covered by entry 1 of Schedule A of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 up to May 10, 1973?" 2.. The material facts of the case relevant for determining the issue arising out of the above question are as follows: The assessee, M/s. Shri Iron and Metal Works, Aurangabad, is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of agricultural implements, galvanised iron pipes, etc. The controversy is in regard to classification of galvanised iron pipes for the purpose of levy of sales tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ("the Act") during the period April 1, 1967 to May 31, 1968. According to the assessee it has to be treated as "agricultural implements", the sales of which were exempt from tax under the Act by virtue of entry 1 of Sched....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e G.I. pipes sold by the assessee being used by the agriculturists in their agricultural operations had to be treated as "agricultural implements" falling under entry 1 of Schedule A. Hence this reference at the instance of the Revenue. 4.. We have heard the counsel for the parties. The contention of Mr. N.T. Saraf, learned counsel for the Revenue is that G.I. pipes cannot be regarded as agricultural implement. G.I. pipes, according to him, are pipes which have diverse uses. It cannot be held to be agricultural implement in the present case by reason of its user by the agriculturists. Mr. R.V. Patel, learned counsel appearing for the assessee, on the other hand, submits that the expression "agricultural implements" is wide enough to i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntity of its own, and which can be put to various uses, cannot be treated as agricultural implement when it is purchased by an agriculturist and used in agricultural operations. The use to which it is put by a particular customer is not decisive factor in arriving at the proper classification in which it can be put. The proper test to be applied in such cases is the common parlance or trade or commercial parlance test. Judging from this test it is difficult to hold G.I. pipes to be "agricultural implements". "G.I. pipes" is an item of day to day use of all sections of the society, viz., householders, traders, agriculturists, factories, industries and water-supply units. It has an independent identity of its own and it is known and understoo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... its own limitations. Certain goods may be put to different uses by different persons. That cannot justify application of different rates of tax for the sales of the very same product by different dealers depending upon the use to which they would be put by the purchasers. 6.. From the above discussion, it is clear that G.I. pipes being an item having diverse uses, no use being more predominant or common than the other, it cannot be interpreted and classified for the purpose of taxation with reference to its user by the purchasers. It is known in common parlance and trade and commercial parlance as "G.I. pipe" and has to be interpreted and classified as such for the purpose of levy of sales tax. The Tribunal was, therefore, not justified....