COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT Vs. R B GARG AND BRORS
LAWS(RAJ)-2002-4-71
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (AT: JAIPUR)
Decided on April 26,2002

COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT Appellant
VERSUS
R B GARG AND BRORS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

RAJESH BALIA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. These two revisions arise out of the common order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board in the case of same assessee-dealer, M/s. R. B. Garg & Brothers in Appeals Nos. 689 of 1997 and 690 of 1997 on August 29, 1998.
(2.) THE only issue raised in these revisions is whether moulds testing equipments used by the assessee in the manufacture can be included in the eligible fixed capital investment for the purpose of computing extent of benefit that can be availed of under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Incentive Scheme, 1987. In the scheme, the maximum amount of incentive by way of tax exemption, which can be availed of by the unit which has been granted eligibility certificate under it, is directly relatable to the eligible fixed capital investment, while the District Level Screening Committee has excluded the cost of mould testing equipments on the ground of a circular issued by the Director (Industries) on October 12, 1995 in which for the purposes of computing eligible fixed capital investment, tools, zigs, and dyes and moulds have been instructed not to be included in the eligible fixed capital investment in establishing the concerned unit or an expansion. THE Tribunal, finding that the moulds testing equipments are essential for the use of plant and machinery and conforms to the normal expression "plant", have to be included in the fixed capital investment for the purpose of computing benefit under the Incentive Scheme. For the purpose of reaching this conclusion, the Tax Board has relied on a decision of the Patna High Court in Steel City Beverages Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1996] 101 STC 510, wherein the Patna High Court was considering whether for a bottling company, bottles and crates are "plant" or not. THE Patna High Court has reiterated the principle that "plant" in its ordinary sense includes whatever apparatus is used by a businessman for carrying on his business; not his stock-in-trade which he buys or makes for sale, but all goods and chattels fixed or movable which he keeps for employment in his business with some degree of durability. It has further been brought to my notice that in a later circular issued by the very same authority, tools, zigs, dyes and moulds which come along with machine, have been included in the eligible fixed capital investment. Apparently, it appears to be a vacillating view on the part of the Industries Department to classify the moulds which are essential for the purpose of bringing out production to be treated as part of the fixed plant and machinery or to be treated merely as chattels. As the department itself had accepted in its later circular to include the cost of moulds testing equipments in the eligible fixed capital investment and the respondent has already been allowed to avail of the benefit in respect of such investment by amending the eligibility certificate to that extent, no interference is called for in these revision petitions and the order passed by the Tax Board. Accordingly, these revision petitions are dismissed, with no orders as to costs. Petitions dismissed. .;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.