C.T.O. vs Champalal Jain and Co.

V.K. Singhal, J.—This revision petition has been filed on the ground that the petitioner has effected sale of tractor and compressor. While issuing the bills, separate price of the tractor and compressor was shown in the bill and the tax while making assessment for the year 1981-82 assessed the tax on the basis of the bills issued. Thereafter, proceedings u/s 12 of the Rajasthan Sales that a new commodity has come into existence and, therefore, the sale of tractor is liable to tax at 8 per cent. The tax and penalty was levied in the reassessment proceedings. The matter was challenged in appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) who came to the conclusion that no process of manufacturing was involved and, therefore, the tax on the sale of tractor could be charged at the rate of 4 per cent and on compressor at the rate of 8 per cent and if either of the commodity is tax-paid, then no tax is leviable as the tax is paid at the first point. The levy of tax, penalty and interest was set aside.

In the second appeal before the Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, it was contended on behalf of the Commercial Taxes Officer that manufacturing process was involved and, therefore, in respect of purchases of either of these two items, the provisions of Section 5(c) would be applicable and on sale full rate of tax in accordance with the provisions of Section 5 will be payable treating them as one commodity. The Sales Tax Tribunal came to the conclusion that the tractor was fitted with compressor and there was no manufacturing process involved. The tractor and compressor are two different commodities which are notified u/s 5 of the Act as taxable at the rate of 4 per cent and 8 per cent respectively. The process which was involved in fixing the compressor with tractor was only with the help of bolt and as such two items were detachable and this was purely a temporary arrangement. The definition of "manufacture" has been given in Section 2(k). According to the definition it is evident that there must be new commodity which is manufactured and has come into existence b any process. There may be a process by which the joining (assembling) of different parts may amount to manufacture, e.g., the cycle. If various parts are being assembled, a new commercial commodity comes into existence is the cycle. In the present case, the work of attachment of compressor is of temporary nature and for a particular job. The compressor is being used only for the purposes of boring in the well and the nuts and bolts, by which attachment is being done, keep the compressor attached with the tractor. When the work is over, the tractor is being taken for other use. The identity and character of the tractor is not list and so is the position of the compressor. The two items have been shown separately in the bills, which also show that there was no agreement with the buyer to purchase these two items. Since no manufacturing process was involved, there was no justification in initiating reassessment proceedings. The Sales Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that no extra tax is leviable on the tractor which is joint with the compressor as no new marketable commodity has come into existence.

The revision petition has no force and is dismissed. No order as to costs.