K. C. AGRAWAL, C. J. - (1.) THIS is a revision filed under section 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 against the order of the Chairman, Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer, dated May 23, 1987, holding that the assessee-respondent was entitled to the benefit of the G. O. No. F. 5 (79) FD/rt/63 dated June 13, 1963. The said notification is quoted below : " F. 5 (79) FD/rt/63 dated June 13, 1963 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 4 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (Rajasthan Act 29 of 1954), the State Government being of the opinion that it is expedient in the public interest to do so hereby exempts from tax, the sale of all machinery for setting up in Rajasthan of textile, ceramic, glass, cement, engineering, sugar, metal industries and industry based (on minerals) with immediate effect, on the following conditions :- (1) The machinery is sold to a manufacturer who holds a valid certificate of registration under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act. (2) The manufacturer so purchasing the goods gives to the seller a declaration in writing that the goods will be used in setting up the abovementioned industries. (3) The dealer holds a valid certificate of exemption for which a fixed annual fee of Rs. 10 is payable. "
(2.) THE assessing authority vide its order dated January 25, 1985, held that the fire-bricks could not be treated as machinery. As such, the assessee misused the declaration form and was liable to pay penalty of Rs. 21,000 under section 16 (1) (k) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act. Against the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), who reduced the penalty to Rs. 16,000. THE assessee-respondent, thereafter, preferred a revision before the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer, which has held that the fire-bricks purchased by the assessee fell within the definition of the word "machinery" of the notification mentioned above, and there was since no misuse of declaration form S. T. 17, the assessee was not liable to any penalty. Aggrieved against the said judgment of the Tribunal, the present revision has been filed. I have already quoted the notification which had been issued by the State Government under sub-section (2) of section 4 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, exempting payment of sales tax on machinery. The learned counsel for the department stated that the fire-bricks which were used by the assessee and for which the declaration had been given does not fall within the notification mentioned above and, as such, the Tribunal committed an error in holding that the assessee-respondent did not file wrong declaration and, as such, was not liable to penalty. The word "machinery" has been defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary, New Seventh Edition as "machines; works of a machine, mechanism; organised system, means arranged for doing; group of contrivances, esp. supernatural persons and incidents, used in literary work". What is really required to see and what is to find out is the intention of the rule-making authority for granting exemption and if read with that in view, it will be found that the benefit intended to be given was only for all machinery needed far setting up in Rajasthan of textiles, ceramic, glass, cement, engineering, sugar, metal industries and industry based (on minerals ). In the instant case, benefit had been claimed by the assessee for the fire-bricks for doing his business in ceramic. Fire-brick is a hardened brick used for manufacturing ceramic. It cannot be and is not machinery. It could not be considered as works of a machine arranged for doing mechanism. Consequently, the Tribunal committed an error in giving the benefit of the notification mentioned above to the assessee-respondent. In this connection, reference be also made to a decision of the, Gujarat High Court reported in Ambika Wood Works v. State of Gujarat [1979] 43 STC 338 wherein the meaning of the word "machinery" has been considered. The relevant portion of that ruling is quoted below : ". . . . . Some solid structure with no moving parts cannot be termed as a machinery within the meaning of entry 15 of Schedule C to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. It would be machinery only if such structure, complete in itself, has moving parts in relation with others when they move interdependently by application of force - mechanical or manual - with an avowed object to produce a given product. In other words, in order to be a machinery, the following four factors must exist, namely : (1) a complete and integrated collection of several objects or articles; (2) these objects or articles should interact in unison upon or with each other; (3) this interaction is prompted by application of force which may be manual or motive power; and (4) the movement should be with a view to do some specific activity or to obtain specific or definite result. " For the reasons given above, I allow the revision, set aside the order of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer and restore that of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) I, Jaipur. Petition allowed. . ;