Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.76 seconds)General Marketing And Manufacturing ... vs State Of Tamil Nadu And Others on 23 August, 1990
24. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Madras High Court in the case of General Marketing and Manufacturing Company Limited v. The State of Tamilnadu 45 STC 96. The facts in that case was, that the assessee was a dealer in automobiles, tractors, earth moving equipments and spares thereof. The question before the Court was, the rate of tax payable on the sales turnover in crawler tractors, dumpers and pay loaders. It is relevant at this stage to notice the two Entries, which fell for consideration of the Court. The one was Entry 55 and the other was Entry 55-A of the Tamilnadu General Sales Tax Act. Entry 55 of the Act was with regard to all varieties of tractors and bulldozers, component parts of tractors, bulldozer, tyres, etc., and Entry 55-A of the Act was with regard to rear dumpers, loaders, scrapers, forklift trucks and other similar variety of machinery of which mechanically propelled vehicle forms an integral part, tyres (including pneumatic types) and tubes ordinarily used for the above (whether or not such tyres and tubes are also used for other vehicles) and articles (excluding batteries) adapted for use generally as parts and accessories of the above. While considering these two Entries, the Court has observed, that in the light of the meaning given to the word 'tractor', in these dictionaries, it would be clear that rear dumper and pay loader sold by the assessee company cannot be called a 'tractor'. The difference between a tractor and other vehicles is that the tractor merely pulls another item of machinery. Rear dumper as well as pay loader are self moving machineries with wheels. As they do not pull any other item, it is not possible to accept the contention that these fall within the scope of the word 'tractor' and in that, event independent of item 55-A they cannot be brought within the scope of the First Schedule.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bombay Etc vs Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. Etc on 27 May, 1997
28. The learned Senior Counsel would tell us further, that, this progressive interpretation is now adopted by the Apex Court, by relying on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. , wherein the Court has observed:
State Of Punjab & Ors vs M/S. Amritsar Beverages Ltd. & Ors on 8 August, 2006
29. The learned Senior Counsel also brings to our notice the view expressed by the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Amritsar Beverages Limited and Ors. [2006] 147 STC 657, wherein the Court has stated, that, creative interpretation has been resorted to by the Court so as to achieve a balance between the age old and the rigid laws on the one hand and advanced technology on the other. The Judiciary always responds to the need of the changing scenario in regard to development technologies. It uses its own interpretative principles to achieve a balance when Parliament has not responded to the need to amend the statute having regard to the developments in the field of science.
State Of Tamil Nadu vs Pyare Lal Malhotra Etc on 19 January, 1976
The word 'machinery' when used in ordinary language, prima facie, means some mechanical contrivances which, by themselves or in combination with one or more other mechanical contrivances by combined movement and interdependent operation of their respective parts generate power, or evoke, modify, apply or direct natural forces with the object in each case of effecting so definite and specific result. After the word 'Machinery' the Legislature has used the expression 'that is to say'. This expression is explained by the Apex Court in number of decisions. We do not intend to burden our judgment with all those decisions, but refer only one of the earliest pronouncement of the Apex Court, which has been consistently followed in subsequent decisions. The Apex Court in the case of State of Tamilnadu v. Pyare Lal Malhotra , has stated, ordinarily the expression Page 0500 'that is to say' is employed to make clear and fix the meaning of what is to be explained or defined. Such words are not used, as a rule, to amplify a meaning while removing a possible doubt for which purpose the word 'includes' is generally employed. In unusual cases, depending upon the context of the words "that is to say", this expression may be followed by illustrative instances. The Entry with which we are concerned, speaks of "machinery" and then the expression "that is to say" is used to include machineries like earth movers. In the Engineering Field, there are various types of machineries used for the purpose of digging and transporting the earth. In order to include the various typos of Earth Movers, the Legislature then again uses the expression "such as". In the context, in which it is used, it can only mean, any type of Earth Movers and saves all species or classes of Earth Movers and by way of illustration, it speaks of dumpers, dippers, bulldozers and anything akin to those machineries. Therefore, by this Entry, the Legislature intends to rope in such machineries, which are mainly used for the purpose of "earth moving" for the purpose of taxation under the KST Act.
British Nationality Act, 1964
Section 22 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Coinage Act, 2011
1