TAMBE, J. - On an application by the dealers under section 34 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act (III of 1953) the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bombay, drew up a statement of the case, and has referred to us the following question of law :

"Whether the plant sold by the applicants (dealers) to the Kolaba Land and Mill Co., Ltd., is covered by item No. 69 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 ?"

The facts giving rise to this reference are briefly these : The dealers Messrs Star Trading Co. (Private) Ltd., deal in articles of mill, gin stores and textile machinery. During the period of assessment, they sold a cooling plant for Rs. 20,000 to the Kolaba Land and Mill Co. Ltd. They have been assessed to sales tax on the said sale at the rate of one anna per rupee under item No. 69 of Schedule B of the Act of 1953. Item No. 69 of Schedule B is in the following terms :-

---------------------------------------------------------------- "Srl. Description Rate of Rate of Rate of No. of goods. sales tax. general tax. purchase tax. ----------------------------------------------------------------

69 Refrigerators Seven naye Three naye Seven naye and air Paise in Paise in the Paise in the conditioning the rupee. rupee. rupee." plants.

----------------------------------------------------------------

It was the contention of the dealers before the Sales Tax Authorities that the cooling plant sold by them to the Kolaba Land and Mill Co., Ltd., was neither a refrigerator nor an air conditioning plant within the meaning of item 69. The contention raised on behalf of the dealers was not accepted by the Sales Tax Authorities. Before the Tribunal, the dealers filed an affidavit, explaining the manner in which the cooling plant worked and was utilised by the mill for purposes of mercerising cotton fabric. The dealers also filed before the Tribunal a letter received by them from the Kolaba Land and Mill Co., Ltd. We will shortly advert to these documents. The Tribunal, after considering the affidavit and the letter, held that the purpose for which the cooling plant was used was to cool a certain solution used for mercerising processes. The cooling plant, therefore, fell within the meaning of the expression "refrigerator" occurring in item 69. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal rejected the contention of the dealers. As already stated, on an application made by them under section 34 the aforesaid question has been referred to us.

It is the contention of Mr. Shah that the Tribunal was in error in holding that the cooling plant used for mercerising processes is a refrigerator within the meaning of item 69. According to him, the expression "refrigerator" has to be understood as is commonly understood by people, "that is, an article of domestic use which is commonly used by people for preserving articles of food and cooling drinks. He placed reliance on the Supreme Court decision in Ramavatar Budhaiprasad v. Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Akola and Another ([1961] 12 S.T.C. 286.). On the other hand, it is the contention of Mr. Joshi that there is no warrant for understanding the expression "refrigerator" in such a narrow sense. That expression would include all cooling agents. Further, it is his contention that whenever the Legislature intended to limiting the levy of tax on articles used in households for domestic purposes, the Legislature had said so. The Legislature has not is any manner limited the scope and ambit of the expression "refrigerator" in item 69. In our opinion, the contentions raised by Mr. Joshi are not without force. The meaning of the expression "refrigerator" as given in the shorter Oxford English Dictionary is in the following terms : "Refrigerator : 1. That which refrigerates or cools. 2. An apparatus, vessel, or chamber for producing or maintaining a low degree of temperature; especially any vessel, chamber, or apparatus in which the content