Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (12) TMI 66

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... moved an application to the Additional Commissioner for advance ruling on the following question:- "Whether the goods namely mobile crane wire ropes are part of the goods as mentioned in Entry No. 155 and accordingly taxable at the rate of 4%. If not, then at what rate the said goods are taxable." 3. The Additional Commissioner by its order dated 27-10-2009 held that the Mobile Crane Wire Ropes cannot be said to be part of Mobile Cranes and since it was not notified anywhere in Schedule I, II, III, IV or VI of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003, as such shall be taxable at the rate notified in Schedule V of the Act 2003. 4. The matter was assailed before the Tax Board. 5. In the connected petitions, STR Nos.99, 100/2013, 101/2013 and 106/2013, a survey took place on 16.12.2008 wherein it was noticed that the said assessee had sold Wire Ropes/Strained Wires, however, paid tax @ 4% whereas as per the Assessing Officer it ought to have been 12.5% and in assessment the differential tax of 8.5% was charged. 6. The matter was assailed before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the appeals in favour of the respondent assessee. 7. The further appeal ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ries Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1976] 37 STC 278 (SC), Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi v. Insulation Electrical (P) Ltd. [2008] 30 STT 01 15 (SC), Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd. v. State of Bihar & Anr. [1995] 96 STC 211 (SC), The Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-Tax and Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam v. Union Carbide India Limited, Madras [1976] 38 STC 198 (Ker), ACTO v. M/s Swastik Agencies [2015] 12 RGSTR 01 P.394 CTO v. M/s Mack Springs Pvt. Ltd. [2006] 15 TUD 01 P.9 (Raj.), and CTO v. P.P. Rubber Products (Pvt.) Ltd. [2016] 25 VAT Reporter 189 (Raj.). 11. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders, so also the judgments cited at the Bar. In my view the claim of the assessee appears to be well justified. It is a Wire Rope and is mainly put in the Mobile Cranes whenever such wire, either becomes loose or breaks, and nothing more. It may be that few people may use it for some other purposes, that does not mean that it becomes a different commodity. It should be part & parcel of Mobile Cranes and nothing more. 12. The apex court in the case of Insulatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 73." To the same effect are the judgments of this Court in the case of Pragati Silicons Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi, 2007 (211) ELT 534 (SC) and Annapurna Carbon Industries Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1976) 2 SCC 273. After considering in detail, the difference between the 'accessories' and 'parts', this Court in the case of Pragati Silicons (supra) came to the conclusion that 'accessory' is something supplementary or subordinate in nature and need not be essential for the actual functioning of the product. Chapter 9401 covers all types of seats and not only the seats of a car and a seat is complete even without the rail assembly front seat, adjuster/assembly slider seat and rear back lock assembly. They are not essential parts of the seat. Chapter heading 9401 covers only the parts of seats and not accessories to the seats. A 'part' is an essential component of the whole without which the whole cannot function. 12. We agree with the view taken by the Tribunal that the products manufactured by the assessee cannot be the 'parts' of seats, as claimed by the revenue. Chapter heading 8708 covers both ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "inputs" would be exempt. It was held that name-plate affixed on the fan was not a piece of decoration and the fan without name- plate could not be marketed, therefore, it was exempt as provided in the notification and the assessee was entitled to exemption. The tyres, tubes and batteries were purchased for being put in the vehicle, which could not be operative without it. They were thus "input". The use of this word was indicative that the benefit was intended for every item which was raw material in the widest sense made wider by using the expression, "input". The purpose was for broadening the meaning of raw material by including in it even those items which could be placed in the vehicle, to make it marketable as vehicles." The Kerala High Court in the case of Union Carbide India Limited (supra), has opined thus :- "...The principle which can be drawn from the above decisions appears to be that a thing is a part of the other only if the other is incomplete without it. A thing is an accessory of the other only if the thing is not essential for the other but only adds to its convenience or effectiveness. Based on this principle the courts held that a typewriter....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... they were taxable @ 6% or 10% in residuary or general category, and held thus :- "9. The Tax Board also noticed in para 8 of its judgment that the facts of the case on record showed that the appellant being the manufacturers of Automobile Leaf Springs, leaves and accessories are registered as such with the Govt. of Maharashtra and they have been granted ISO certificate as manufacturers of Automobile Leaf Springs and Assemblies. They manufacture leaf springs for exclusive use in various types of motor vehicles like Tata. Telco. Mahindra & Mahendra etc. and sell it only to auto dealers for use in motor vehicles. Their published price List for leaf springs also indicates that they offer leaf spring for various auto vehicles only. Therefore all these facts on record predominantly establish that the leaf springs manufactured and marketed by the appellants were available for exclusive use for motor vehicles only. 10. The Tax board also rightly relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Atul Glass Industries' case (supra) where the Apex Court held that the screens, although commonly known as wind screens,-rear screens and door screens, manufacture....