Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.28 seconds)Section 2 in Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 [Entire Act]
Section 15A in Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 [Entire Act]
Section 15A in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
M/S Addison & Co.Ltd vs State Of Karnataka Rep By Commr Com.Tax on 26 February, 2009
44. The decision of this court in the case of 'ADDISON &
CO., LTD., v. STATE OF KARNATAKA' rendered by this
court in CRP No.457/2006 and affirmed by the Supreme
Court is relied upon by learned Additional Government
Advocate to submit that this decision constitutes an
authority for holding that tool bids, cutters, blades used
along with other machinery forms part or accessory of the
machinery and therefore is taxable under Entry-52 of the
Schedule-I to the Act and the products in the case of
ADDISON & CO., [supra] and in the present case being of
the like nature, of like use, it should be taken that the
taxability of such goods in the hands of the assessee is
37
concluded in terms of the Judgment of the Supreme
Court.
Nagar Mahapalika Bareilly vs State Of U.P. & Others on 2 February, 1988
55. This position has been distinguished by the learned
government advocate by pointing out that the judgment in
the case of M/S RAJA MOTORS [supra] is not an authority
for referential legislation; that the judgment in the case of
KENNAMETTAL WIDIA INDIA LTD [supra] has no
relevance, as it was not considered the scope of a
notification granting exemption under Section 8(A) of the
Act and examination was in a totally different context and
in so far as the decision in the case of NAGAR
MAHAPALIKA, BARELLY [supra] is concerned, it is
submitted that examination was in the context as to
whether the product fitted into Entry 7 of the very
schedule as it stood at the relevant point of time and
therefore all these decisions may not be of much use for
the purpose of understanding the scope of Entry 52 of first
schedule to the Act.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial ... vs Mysore Industrial Supplies on 20 June, 1996
103. However, we would also add to that Judgment to
indicate that the very entry of goods by themselves does
not attract tax, but it is only when entry of the goods
mentioned in the Schedule-I is caused by a dealer, for
consumption, use or sale therein. The combination of sub-
sections [1] and [2] of Section 3 of the Act indicates that it
is the dealer who is made responsible for payment of tax
under the Act and identification of the goods even at the
entry point is to be as understood in the market parlance
as can be distinguished with the understanding of the
goods on a technical view point or from a scientific point of
view. But, the understanding even in the case of MYSORE
81
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES [supra] was in the context of
examining the scope of Entry-7 as it stood then reading as
'Industrial machineries and parts and accessories thereof'.
K.B. Dani vs State Of Karnataka on 20 July, 1979
76. Sri Rabhinathan has also placed reliance on the
judgment of this court in the case of K B DANI vs STATE
OF KARNATAKA [(1979) 44 STC 276, where this court
had occasion to examine the question as to a trailer is part
or accessory of a tractor and having opined that a tractor
is in the nature of an agricultural machinery and that
contention that tractor trailer is not in the nature of
machinery was not taxable within the scope of entry 20 of
second schedule to KST Act and on the same analogue,
cutting tools brought into local area by the assessee being
just used by propelling or applying a circular motion by
using an independent machine cannot be called as either
part or accessory to a machine which propels or renders
circular motion to the tool and therefore it has to be taken
out of the scope of Entry 52 of first schedule to the Act,
64
which includes only machinery, parts and accessories
thereof. Submission is that tools are neither parts nor
accessories. It is also urged that as tools do not have
either convenience of the machinery or effectiveness of the
machinery, but they cannot be called as an accessory.