SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1972 Supreme(P&H) 141

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
D.K.Mahajan and D.S.Tewatia JJ.
Karnal Machinery Store
Versus
Assessing Authority
Civil Writ No. 2295 of 1970,
Decided On : MAY 15, 1972

Monoblock pumping sets used by agriculturists for irrigation purposes are agricultural implements and are not liable to sales tax.

Headnote:

SALES TAX - Monoblock pumping sets - Whether agricultural implements - Held, yes - Pumping sets used by agriculturists for irrigation purposes are agricultural implements - Sales tax not leviable.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, dealers in monoblock pumping sets, challenged the order of the Assessing Authority, Karnal, charging sales tax at the rate of 10 percent on the price of the pumping sets sold by them from 22nd August 1968 to 31st March 1969 and at the rate of 6 percent thereafter. They contended that the pumping sets fell under item 34 in Schedule B of the Punjab Sales Tax Act, as applicable to Haryana, and were, therefore, not liable to any sales tax.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that monoblock pumping sets are agricultural implements when used by agriculturists for agricultural operations. The court relied on the fact that the main purpose of the machine is to pump water, which is essential for irrigation of agricultural lands. The court also noted that the electric motor is merely the locomotion to work the pump and that if the pumping part is removed, it ceases to be of any use as a pump.

Issues: 1. Whether monoblock pumping sets are agricultural implements? 2. Whether sales tax is leviable on the sale of monoblock pumping sets used by agriculturists for irrigation purposes?

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the following legal principles in reaching its decision: 1. The expression "electrical goods" is not defined in the Punjab Sales Tax Act or the Rules thereunder. It must, therefore, be construed in the sense it is used in common parlance. 2. In construing the word "electrical goods", the court must consider the intrinsic nature and the purpose for which a tool is used. 3. A tool that is used mainly for agricultural operations is an agricultural implement, even if it is motivated by electrical energy.

Final Decision: The court allowed both the petitions and quashed the orders of the assessing authority, imposing sales tax on the sale of monoblock pumps to agriculturists to irrigate their lands. It held that sales tax was not leviable on the sale of monoblock pumping sets used by agriculturists for irrigation purposes.

Judgment

Mahajan, J.

1. This order will dispose of Civil Writs Nos. 1552 and 2295 of 1970. They are directed against the order of the Assessing Authority, Karnal, charging sales tax at the rate of 10 percent, on the price of the "monoblock pumping sets" sold by the respective dealers with effect from 22nd August, 1968, to 31st March, 1969 and at the rate of 6 per cent, thereafter. The assessment year in Civil Writ No. 1552 (Messrs. Anil Traders, Chaura Bazar, Karnal) is 1966-67 and in Civil Writ No. 2295 of 1970 (Messrs. Karnal Machinery Store, Karnal) is 1968-69. The petitioners instead of going up in appeal to the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana and in further appeal to the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana, have come to this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Their contention is that the "monoblock pumping sets" do not fall under item 17 in Schedule A, but fall under item 34 in Schedule B and, therefore, these pumping sets are not liable to any sales tax.

2. Section 4 of the Punjab Sales Tax Act as applicable to Haryana, provides that:

Subject to the provisions of Sections 5 and 6, every dealer, except one dealing exclusively in goods declared tax-free under Section 6, whose gross turnover during the year immediately preceding the commencement of this Act exceeded the taxable quantum, shall be liable to pay tax under this Act on all sales effected after the coming into force of this Act.

3. Section 5 provides the rate of tax. In the case of luxury goods the extent of tax is 10 per cent., whereas in the case of other goods, it is 6 per cent. Luxury goods have been enumerated in Schedule A, but have not been defined either in the Act or the Rules made thereunder. Section 6 deals with tax-free goods. Tax-free goods are specified in the first column of Schedule B. Section 6 enables the Government to put conditions and make exceptions with regard to tax-free goods. The Government can, after giving a notice of not less than two months, either add to or delete from Schedule B.

4. Sales tax authorities have treated the "monoblock pumping sets" as goods falling in Schedule A, entry 17. This entry reads as under :

Electrical goods other than electrical plants, equipments and their accessories including service meters required for generation, transmission and distribution.

5. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, is that "monoblock pumping sets" are not luxury goods, much less electrical goods. It is further contended that "monoblock pumping sets" are agricultural implements and, therefore, fall in Schedule B, entry 34, vide Section 6 of the Act. The assessing authority did not accept the stand taken by the assessee and treating the pumps as electrical goods and thus luxury goods, imposed tax at the rate of 10 per cent, for the period already specified and thereafter at he rate of 6 per cent.

6. In these petitions no objection has been raised by the State that the normal procedure provided in the Act has not been followed, namely, an appeal, further appeal and then a reference to this court and, therefore, they should not be entertained. As these petitions have been admitted and there is a reference on the same point in the case of Messrs. Gandhi General Store (Sales Tax Reference No. 5 of 1971), we have decided to dispose of these petitions on merits.

7. The first question that has to be determined is whether "monoblock pumping sets" are agricultural implements. It can be least doubted that pumping sets have to be motivated either by electric energy or by oil engines or by any other means which can provide locomotion. The purpose of these pumps is to draw water from the soil either for irrigation of lands or for drinking purposes or for industrial purposes. If one says that the pumping sets are merely used for the purpose of agriculture, the statement will not be wholly true. Similarly, the converse will also be not true, namely, that the pumping sets have nothing to do with agricultural operation. In fa


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top