ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The assessee, M/s. Electronics Corporation of India Ltd., is the petitioner. The assessment relates to the years 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74. The Appeals Nos. 54 to 56 of 1977 in regard to the assessment orders for these years were disposed of by a common order by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(2.) The petitioner is a Government of India undertaking which manufactures various items of electronic equipment. The Commercial Tax Officer taxed the entire turnover of 1971-72 at 10 per cent; part of the turnover of 1972-73 at 7 per cent and the remainder at 10 per cent; part of the turnover of 1973-74 at 10 per cent and the remaining at 12 per cent. These were appeals to the Assistant Commissioner who rejected and appeals for 1971-72 and 1972-73. Regarding the year 1973-74 he set aside the order of the Commercial Tax Officer and directed him to ascertain the turnover relating to television and its components and parts and computers and restrict the tax to that turnover at 10 per cent or 12 per cent, as the case may be, and levy tax on the rest of the disputed turnover at 7 per cent or 8 per cent, as the case may be, as electrical goods. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal in regard to the assessment relating to all the three years. The main contention of the assessee before the Tribunal was that the goods manufactured by it are not electrical goods within the meaning of item 37 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act applicable for the relevant assessment years. The Tribunal took the view that for the purpose of levying sales tax, all the electronic devices marketed by the appellant both in form and substance are not in any way different from electrical appliances. In coming to this conclusion the Tribunal considered five questions : (1) what is electricity; (2) what is electronics; (3) points of similarly between electricity and electronics; (4) points of difference or distinguishing features between electricity and electronics; and (5) whether electronic equipment can also be called as electrical equipment. After considering the meaning of these two expressions in the dictionary, Encyclopedia Britannia and various text books on Electricity and Electronics, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that electronics is a branch of electricity and there does not seem to be much difference between electric appliances and electronic devices. Having come to this conclusion, the Tribunal felt that some of the items may come under specific item, viz., item 3 and item 12, i.e., wireless reception instruments and apparatus, radios, etc., and typewriters, tabulating machines, calculating machines, etc. As the question whether some of the goods manufactured and marketed by the petitioner would come under item 3 or item 12 or under the general item 37 was not considered by the departmental authorities, it directed the assessing authority to obtain the turnover particulars in respect of the items falling under the above heads and determine the amount of tax payable at the prescribed rates. In the result, the Tribunal set aside the order of the authorities below and directed them to reframe the assessments in the light of the directions in that order. The assessee has filed these revision petitions against the order of the Tribunal.

(3.) The main contention urged by Sri Anantha Babu, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the Tribunal was wrong in holding that all the electronic goods manufactured and marketed by the petitioner are electrical goods within the meaning of item 37. He submitted that the assessees contention is that the term "electrical goods" as commonly understood by those dealing with such goods either as traders or customers would not include electronic goods manufactured and marketed by the assessee. They do not also come within items 3 and 12. In other words, they are not covered by any of the items in the schedule and hence they must be taxed as general goods. The learned Government Pleader on the other hand contended that the Tribunal was right in holding that all electronic goods are electrical goods within the meaning of item 37. At any rate some of them would fall within items 3 and 12 and tax should be levied on that basis.