STAR RADIO ELECTRIC CO Vs. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal has in this matter referred the following question to this court for its opinion : " Whether a fluorescent tube without its accessories, namely, choke and starter, is a domestic electrical appliance within the meaning of entry 52 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 (amended) ?"

(2.) THE question arises in this manner. THE applicants M/s. Star Radio Electric Co. are the dealers in electrical goods, radios etc. During the assessment period from 1st January, 1959, to 31st December, 1959, they are found to have sold some fluorescent tubes without chokes and starters. THE concerned Sales Tax Officer held that the tubes thus sold without chokes and starters are covered by entry 52 of Schedule B to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, which is found in the following terms : " Domestic electrical appliances other than torches, torch cells and filament lighting bulbs. " Being aggrieved by this decision of the Sales Tax Officer, the applicants-assessees preferred an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner but failed there. THErefore, they approached the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, in revision and having failed there also they approached the Tribunal in revision. THE Tribunal held that since the main component of the appliance is the tube, which gives light, the tube without starter and choke can be described as a domestic electrical appliance contemplated by entry 52. Being aggrieved by this decision of the Tribunal, the applicants-assessees have preferred this reference in which the above-quoted question is referred to this court.

(3.) A device is used "as a means" only when it serves some purpose. If it does not serve any purpose, it ceases to be a "means". Therefore, its service "as a means to an end" is its main feature which brings it within the definition of the expression "appliance". This is the second aspect of the matter which has been considered in an American decision in Honakar v. Pocatalico District Board of Education (24 S. R. 544 ). We have not got before us the law report in which this case is reported, but at the foot-note No. 25 in the above volume of Corpus Juris Secundum at page 80 we find that in that case, the court considered an "educational appliance" and observed that an "educational appliance" is something necessary or useful to enable the teacher to teach the school children, and "must be shown to be suitable and reasonably necessary for the use of the public schools". This decision obviously emphasises the utility aspect of the appliance. As a matter of fact, both the aspects discussed above require us to take an integrated view of the whole apparatus or device which is under consideration. It is, therefore, now necessary to consider whether a fluorescent tube, without a choke and a starter, can be considered an appliance if viewed from these two aspects. Before actually discussing this question, it would be proper to know what a fluorescent tube is and what service it is expected to render.