Skip to content


Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Punjab Gramophone House - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.T.R. No. 30 of 1975
Judge
Reported in[1979]43STC141(All)
AppellantCommissioner of Sales Tax
RespondentPunjab Gramophone House
Advocates: S.N. Upadhya, Adv.
Cases ReferredCoimbatore v. State of Madras
Excerpt:
- - the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the revision filed by the commissioner of sales tax failed......case, the revising authority was justified in holding that gramophone needles are not component parts of gramophone ?2. the assessee carried on business in gramophone, its needles, radio, etc. the turnover of the assessee was estimated. the estimate included the turnover of rs. 9,371.19 for gramophone needles. according to the assessee, this turnover was taxable at the rate of 2 per cent, gramophone needles being unclassified items, while according to the assessing authority, needles were liable to tax at the rate of 10 per cent being components of gramophone. the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the revision filed by the commissioner of sales tax failed.3. the question posed is as to whether gramophone needles are 'component parts of the gramophone'. it has arisen in the.....
Judgment:

C.S.P. Singh, J.

1. The following question has been referred for opinion of this Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. :

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the revising authority was justified in holding that gramophone needles are not component parts of gramophone ?

2. The assessee carried on business in gramophone, its needles, radio, etc. The turnover of the assessee was estimated. The estimate included the turnover of Rs. 9,371.19 for gramophone needles. According to the assessee, this turnover was taxable at the rate of 2 per cent, gramophone needles being unclassified items, while according to the assessing authority, needles were liable to tax at the rate of 10 per cent being components of gramophone. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the revision filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax failed.

3. The question posed is as to whether gramophone needles are 'component parts of the gramophone'. It has arisen in the context of Notification No. ST-1738/X-1012-1963 dated 1st June, 1963, issued under Section 3-A of the Act. Item No. 7 of this notification contains the entry 'gramophones and component parts thereof and records'. In case gramophone needles fall within the term 'gramophones and component parts thereof', they would be taxable under the notification under Section 3-A at the rate of 10 paise per rupee. On the contrary, if they do not answer this description, it will be taxable as an unclassified item at a lower rate of tax. As the words 'component parts' have been used in reference to gramophones, they refer only to such parts as are integral to the gramophone and go to constitute the mechanical contrivance known as 'gramophone'. One of the simple tests to be applied in order to determine whether a particular part is a 'component part' of the complete machine is to see as to whether in case the machine is disassembled, the part in question would be one of the parts found on disassembling. This in substance is the test applied in a number of cases brought to my notice, viz., Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Pritam Singh [1968] 22 S.T.C. 414, Agarwala Brothers v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. [1969] 23 S.T.C. 306 and F. Rose Mary Carpentry Works, Coimbatore v. State of Madras [1964] 15 S.T.C. 924. Once this test is applied, which it must in view of high authority, gramophone needles would not fall within the category of 'component parts of gramophone' as they do not constitute one of the integral parts which combine to make up a gramophone. Gramophone needles may be required in order that records may be played on the gramophone, but neither the gramophone records nor the needles are integral constituents of the gramophone. Gramophone needle is as such not a 'component part' of the gramophone.

4. The question referred is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. As none has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee, there shall be no order as to costs.


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