2012 (8) TMI 868

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d D. Venkatesh For the Respondent : Shivayogiswamy, Additional Government Advocate, ORDER:- The order of the court was made by K. SREEDHAR RAO J.-The above petitions involve common question of law and facts. Hence, they are taken up together. 2. The above petitions pertain to the assessment years 1996-97 to 2001-2002. In these cases, the petitioner is the manufacturer of vibratory c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2001 (I) and FD 117 CSL 2001 (II) dated July 26, 2001?" 4. Counsel for the respondent strenuously contended that the order of the appellate authority is sound and proper. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) has succinctly dealt with the concept of earth mover, which is defined under Part M, entry 1(i)(a) of the KST Act as earth movers, such as dumpers, dippers, bulldozers and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion of "earth mover" is inclusive one. Any other machinery, which is similar to the machinery stated in Part M, entry 1(i)(a) of the Act also would get included to constitute earth mover. 6. On going through the submissions made at the Bar, we do not find any good reason to reject the contention of the petitioner. Because, the vibratory compactor does the function of putting waste vertically i....