Micro Fine Bushings vs State of Tamil Nadu

Abdul Hadi, J.—The assessee has preferred this tax case revision u/s 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to

as ""the Act"") in relation to the assessment year 1980-81 in respect of two turnovers, one relating to additions made by the authorities below to the

extent of Rs. 22,438 and the other relating to a turnover of Rs. 1,12,188. In so far as the former is concerned, learned counsel for the assessee-

petitioner himself represents that he is not pressing the said point.

Regarding the abovesaid turnover to the extent of Rs. 1,12,188, the question is whether this turnover falls under entry 81 of the First Schedule

as held by all the three authorities below and consequently suffers tax at the rate of 6 per cent or whether it should suffer tax at the multi-point rate

of 4 per cent as contended by the assessee. In relation to this turnover, what has been sold is ""jig bushes"". The authorities below have held that this

commodity would come under the term ""parts and accessories of such machinery"" found in the last part of entry 81. But, the contention of learned

counsel for the assessee is that these ""jig bushes"" by themselves are machineries and cannot be ""parts and accessories"" of any machinery. Learned

counsel for the Revenue says that these jig bushes cannot be termed as ""machineries by themselves"". Alternatively she argues that even assuming

that these bushes are by themselves machineries, they would only fall under entry 81. On this aspect, learned counsel for the assessee submits that

not all machineries would come under entry 81, but only machineries worked by (1) electricity, (2) diesel or petrol, (3) furnace oil, (4) kerosene,

(5) coal including charcoal, or (6) any other from of fuel or power, would come under entry 81. In other words, according to him, the jig bushes

are machineries, which are not worked by any one of the above referred to six fuel items.

But, there is absolutely no factual proof or material to hold so. So, even assuming that the abovesaid jig bushes are machineries, the assessee,

having not proved that they are worked by a different device other than mentioned in entry 81, only a single point levy could be levied under entry

81 and not multi-point levy, as contended by the assessee. So, on this point, this tax case has to be dismissed.

Accordingly this tax case revision is dismissed. No costs.

Petition dismissed.