Mittal Pipe Manufacturing Company vs The State of Haryana

S.P. Goyal, J.—During the assessment year 1972-73, the petitioner-firm was charged 6 per cent tax on the sales of tubular trusses which were manufactured by joining pipes, channels, tees, sheets, etc. and were to be used for support of roofs for the godowns of the Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board. It was contended before the Assessing Authority that tubular trusses were nothing but steel structurals within the meaning of sub-item (v) of item (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act and, as such, being the declared goods were liable to sales tax at the rate of 3 per cent only. This contention having been rejected up to the Tribunal the petitioner moved an application u/s 42(1) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, for referring the following two questions to this Court :

(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, it could be said that the various items mentioned in sub-item (v) of item (iv) of Section 14 after being joined lose their identity and become different item ?

(2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale of tubular trusses was not covered by sub-item (v) of item (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act ?

Their application was rejected with the observation that the Tribunal has correctly interpreted the law. From the said observation it is apparent that even in the opinion of the Tribunal, the questions posed were questions of law. Otherwise also, it has never been doubted that the question as to whether certain goods fall within a particular entry or not, is always a question of law. The prayer for reference, therefore, could not be declined on the ground that the Tribunal has correctly interpreted the law unless the matter was directly covered by some decision of this Court or of the Supreme Court.

It is only question No. (2) which strictly arises in the present case and question No. (1) is in the nature of an argument. Consequently, the Tribunal is directed to refer the following question together with the statement of the case to this Court :

Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale of tubular trusses was not covered by sub-item (v) of item (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act ?