VICAS TRACTORS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question which arises for our consideration in this reference is whether the Massey-Ferguson farm tractor sold by the assessee is an "agricultural machinery" within the meaning of entry 12 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ).

(2.) THE assessee is a firm carrying on business as a dealer in the goods manufactured by Messrs Tractors and Farm Equipment Private Limited, Madras. THE manufacturers are successors to Messrs Massey-Ferguson (India) Limited and are associated with Messrs Massey-Ferguson (U. K.) Ltd. THEy are engaged in the manufacture and marketing of Massey-Ferguson farm machinery in India including Massey-Ferguson farm tractors and farm implements of various kinds. THE assessee sold a tractor of the above-mentioned variety to one Bhikhabhai Hamirbhai under bill No. TF/140 dated 24th March, 1965. THE assessee then made an application to the Commissioner of Sales Tax under section 52 of the Act for determination of the question as to what was the rate of tax payable on the sale of the said tractor. Along with the application, the assessee submitted a copy of the bill and later on the assessee produced before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, who heard the said application, additional evidence in the shape of certain booklets and pamphlets describing the essential characteristics of Massey-Ferguson tractors. THE contention of the assessee before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax was that the tractors in question were manufactured with the object, design and mechanism which made them more suitable for being used for agricultural purposes. THE assessee, therefore, contended that the tractor in question was "agricultural machinery" covered by entry 12 of Schedule C and was liable to be taxed at the rate mentioned in the said entry. THE Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax by his order dated 30th November, 1965, held that the tractor in question was not "agricultural machinery" within the meaning of the said entry but was covered by the residuary entry 22 of Schedule E and was liable to be taxed accordingly. In coming to this conclusion, the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax relied upon the decision of the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in the case of M/s. Vicas Corporation (vide Appeal No. 31 of 1960 decided on 22nd February, 1961) and also upon the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in M/s. Agrawal Bros. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh ([1965] 16 S. T. C. 860 ). According to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, the question was covered by the said two decisions and it was, therefore, not possible to accept the contention of the assessee that the tractor in question was "agricultural machinery" within the meaning of entry 12 of Schedule C to the Act.

(3.) ALONG with the statement of the case, the Tribunal has annexed at annexure 3 a copy of the said bill, at annexure 4 a list of books referred to in the statement of the case and cited before the Tribunal and at annexure 5 a copy of the certificate dated 15th February, 1961, given by the marketing manager of the Tractors and Farm Equipment Private Ltd. , to which we have referred above.