Skip to content


Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Ajay Metal Products - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.T.R. No. 187 of 1969
Judge
Reported in[1970]26STC433(All)
AppellantCommissioner, Sales Tax
RespondentAjay Metal Products
Advocates:Standing Counsel
Excerpt:
- .....the case and has invited the opinion of this court on the following question of law :-whether the steel doors are hardwares taxable at 3 per cent. or building materials taxable at 2 per cent. 2. the assessee manufactures and sells steel almirahs and steel doors. the dispute relates to the turnover of steed doors in respect of the assessment year 1963-64. the department assessed his turnover at the rate of 3 per cent. treating it to be an article of hardware, whereas the assessee contended that the out-turn should have been assessed at 2 per cent. as building material under section 3 of the act. in s.t.r. no. 576 of 1968* decided on the 13th november, 1969, a division bench of this court, while dealing with a similar question relating to steel trunk, has pointed out the distinction.....
Judgment:

R.L. Gulati, J.

1. Under Section 11(1), U.P. Sales Tax Act, the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra, has submitted the statement of the case and has invited the opinion of this court on the following question of law :-

Whether the steel doors are hardwares taxable at 3 per cent. or building materials taxable at 2 per cent.

2. The assessee manufactures and sells steel almirahs and steel doors. The dispute relates to the turnover of steed doors in respect of the assessment year 1963-64. The department assessed his turnover at the rate of 3 per cent. treating it to be an article of hardware, whereas the assessee contended that the out-turn should have been assessed at 2 per cent. as building material under Section 3 of the Act. In S.T.R. No. 576 of 1968* decided on the 13th November, 1969, a Division Bench of this court, while dealing with a similar question relating to steel trunk, has pointed out the distinction between the hardware industry and the iron and steel industry as is understood in the commercial community. Following that judgment we are of the opinion that the steel doors will not be covered by the term hardware. They would be an unclassified commodity and may be described as building material. Therefore the turnover of steel doors would be taxable under Section 3 and not at 3 per cent. as classified item. We accordingly answer the question by saying steel doors are not hardwares and as such will be taxable at 2 per cent. as unclassified item or as building material but not at 3 per cent. as an item of hardware. As no one has appeared on behalf of the assessee, we make no order as to costs. The fee of the learned counsel for the department is assessed at Rs. 100.

*Since reported as Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Aftab Husain Imdad Husain [1970] 25 S.T.C. 471.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //