V. C. DAGA, J. - These two references are forwarded by the Sales Tax Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue for opinion of this Court under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ("the Act", for short). Since the issues in both these references are identical, both the references are heard and disposed of by a common judgment. For the sake of convenience we have taken the facts from the case of M/s. Neelam Appliances.

Statement of facts :

The respondent-Neelam Appliances is a manufacturer of stainless steel articles registered under the provisions of the Act. The respondent applied to the Commissioner of Sales Tax for determination of the correct rate of tax on the sale of stainless steel water filter, effected under their invoice No. 42/93-94 dated May 3, 1993.

It was the contention of the respondent before the Commissioner of Sales Tax as also before the Tribunal that the stainless steel water filter was stainless steel utensil, covered by Schedule entry C-II-46 covered by entry No. 145(1) of notification issued under the provisions of section 41 of the Act, thereby it attracts tax at 1 per cent.

The Commissioner of Sales Tax by order dated July 12, 1993 passed under section 52 held that water filter would fall under the residual entry C-II-102, attracting tax liability at 10 per cent.

The respondent aggrieved by the aforesaid determination invoked appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal and reiterated their contentions which were canvassed before the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Tribunal, however, held that the stainless steel water filter was an item of utensil falling in the entry C-II-46 of the Schedule under the Act and covered by entry No. 145(1) of the notification issued under the Act attracting tax at the rate of 1 per cent.

Question of law :

Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid decision, the applicant-Revenue is before us through this reference at the instance of the Tribunal to seek opinion of this Court on the substantial question of law reproduced hereinbelow :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal justified in law in holding that the item stainless steel water filter sold by the opponent/original appellant is a utensil covered by C-II-46 of the Schedule to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 and would be entitled to be covered under entry No. 145(1) of the notification issued under section 41 of the said Act ?"

Statutory provision :

Before adverting to rival submissions, it would be profitable to refer to the relevant statutory provisions, which are as under :

The relevant entry and notification reads as under :

Entry C-II-46 :

"Stainless steel articles and utensils other than those specified elsewhere."

Notification entry 145(1) :

Sales or purchases of stainless steel utensils covered by entry 46 in Part II of the Schedule C appended to the Act, of the kind used for household purposes, made during the period from April 1, 1993 to March 31, 1994. (both days inclusive).

Submissions :

When this matter was called out for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue was absent.

Shri R. A. Harpale, Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, who was present in court sought an adjournment to make alternate arrangement. Since this matter was adjourned from time to time, we thought it fit not to grant adjournment and chose to hear Shri Harpale, who expressed his willingness to argue this case on behalf of the department, which he argued with precision dissecting all the relevant provisions of the Act to bring home his view points. We must place our appreciation for his assistance to this Court better than most of the advocates appearing on behalf of the department.

Shri Harpale, representing the Revenue, submitted that "water filter" as alleged by the appellant cannot be equated with stainless steel articles and utensils. He submits that water filter is not only used in kitchen but is also used in offices and at various other places other than kitchen. He submits t