R. R. MISRA, J. - (1.) The present revision has been filed against an order dated 5th May, 1986 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal for the assessment year 1982-83. The assessee in the said year was a manufacturer of wooden gitti and round boards, etc. The short question involved for determination in the present revision is as to whether the said goods are taxable as electrical goods as classified item. The department had taxed the goods as accessories of electrical goods as a classified item at the rate of 12 per cent. but the Tribunal had upheld the contention of the assessee holding the taxability of the said goods as unclassified item at the rate of 7 per cent. on the basis of decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bharat Traders [1974] 33 STC 3; 1973 UPTC 567. I have heard learned Standing Counsel. Nobody appears for the assessee. The contention raised by the learned Standing Counsel is that in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bharat Traders [1974] 33 STC 3 (All.); 1973 UPTC 567 the notification of 1965 was considered and there the word "accessories" was not included in the said notification. He in turn now relies upon the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Kumar Electric and General Stores 1980 UPTC 729 (All. ). This case related to the assessment year 1973-74 and has considered the earlier decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bharat Traders [1974] 33 STC 3; 1973 UPTC 567. The case of Bharat Traders [1974] 33 STC 3 (All); 1973 UPTC 567 was distinguished by the aforesaid later decision of this Court on the ground that the word "accessories" did not appear in entry 7 of the First Schedule of the relevant notification. The expression "accessories" and component parts was added for the first time by the notification dated 15th November, 1971. In this view of the matter, this Court in the case of Kumar Electric and General Stores 1980 UPTC 729 took the view that the goods in dispute are taxable as unclassified item as accessories of electrical goods and taxable at the rate of 12 per cent. In this view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal becomes manifestly erroneous in law and is liable to be set aside. In the result, the revision succeeds and is allowed with costs. The impugned order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal is set aside with the observations made above and it is held that baton and board manufactured by the assessee are liable to be taxed as unclassified item at the rate of 12 per cent. .;