Holding

A flap being an accessory of an article falling under sub‑entry (2) of Entry 43 cannot be classified as an accessory of an article falling under sub‑entry (1).

Summary

The appellants, manufacturers of rubber flaps used to protect tyre tubes, were taxed under sub‑entry (2) of Entry 43 of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948 as accessories of motor vehicles. They contended that the flaps were not accessories of a motor vehicle but only of tyres or tubes and should therefore be taxed as unclassified goods at 8%. The High Court and the Tribunal held the flaps to be accessories of motor vehicles and upheld the tax. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the meaning of "accessory" and the two‑part structure of Entry 43, concluding that a flap, being an accessory of an article falling under sub‑entry (2), cannot be classified as an accessory of an article falling under sub‑entry (1). Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the High Court’s judgment set aside. No order as to costs was made.

Issues considered

Whether rubber flaps can be classified as accessories of motor vehicles under sub‑entry (1) of Entry 43 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.
Whether a product that is an accessory of an item falling under sub‑entry (2) can be treated as an accessory of an item falling under sub‑entry (1).
Interpretation of the term "accessory" in the context of the Schedule to the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948s. 3-A(a), s. 3-A(b), s. 3-A(c), s. 3-A(d), s. 3-A(e)

Subjects

Sales taxClassificationAccessoryEntry 43Rubber flapUttar Pradesh Sales Tax ActInterpretation of statutes

Judgment

f

A MIS. UNITED COPIEX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX

MARCH 25, 1996

B [B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND SUHAS C. SEN, JJ.]

U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 : Sections 3-A(a) to (e)-Schedu/e-Entry
43( I) and (2)-lnteipretation of-'Rubber f!ap'-Used as a protective device
between tube and rint-He/d being an accesso1y of an article falling under
C sub-ent1y 2 it cannot be classified under sub-entry (I).

The appellants are manufacturers of rubber flaps which are used for
giving support to the rubber tubes used in the tyres of motor vehicles.
Their turnover was taxed under sub-entry 2 of entry 43 of the Schedule to
D the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, treating them to be an accessory of the motor
vehicles. The assessee unsuccessfully challenged the levy before the Appel·
late Authority as well as the Tribunal. The High Court also upheld the view
that the rubber flaps were taxable as accessory of motor vehicles.

Jn appeal to this Court it was contended for the appellant that the
E rubber flaps did not fall under any of the specific heads in the Schedule
and therefore, the only way to tax them was by taking recourse to sub·
clause (e) of Section 3A(l).

Allowing
,.;
the appeal and setting aside the judgment of the High
Court, this Court
F
HELD : 1. A flap being an accessory of an article falling under
sub-entry (2) of Entry 43 cannot be classified as an accessory of an article
falling in sub-entry (1). Entry 43 has been split up into two parts. The first
part deals with motor vehicle etc. and the second part deals with com·
G ponents, parts and accessories of vehicles mentioned in the first part.
Tyres and tubes are included in the phrase 'components, parts and acces·
sories of vehicles'. A protective cover like a rubber flap may be treated as
an accessory of something which is an accessory of the motor vehicle. But
that will not make the protective cover an accessory of the vehicle itself.
H [831-G·H; 832-A]
826
I~
! .

I ;
I '

UNITED COPIEXv. COMMR. OFS.T.°[S.C.SEN,J.] PJJ.7

2. 'Rubber Oap' can hardly be described as an accessory or a vehicle. A
Meaning or 'accessory', Is a person or thing that aids subordinately; an
adjunct; appurtenance; accompaniment. The 'robber Oap', which is used
to protect the tubes of the tyres, is not an adjunct, appurtenance or
accompaniment to a motor vehicle. At the highest, it can be said that it
Increases the life of the tube by keeping it away from direct contact with B
the rim 'of a wheel. Sub·entry (1) does not include tyres and tubes or any
other components, part or acces.Sory within the description of 'motor
vehicles'. Tyres and tubes have been specifically and separately in sub·
entry (2) alongwith 'components, parts and accessories of .-ehicles
specified in sub-entry (1)'. The Oap may be used as an adjunct to the tyre
or an extra piece or robber to give additional protection to the tubes. It C
may be an accessory of an item falling under sub-entry (2) of Entry 43, but
it cannot be treated as an accessory of the motor' vehicle itself which falls
in sub-entry (1). [830-C-F] ·· ·
(
Modi Rubber Ltd. v. State of Kera/a Govt., (1991) 81 STC 225 and
State of Orissa v. Dunlop India Ltd., (1993) 91 STC 379, referred to. D
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4821 of
1996 Etc.

From the Judgment and Order dated 18.1.94 of the Allahabad High E
Court in S.T.R. No. 1878 of 1993.

Harish N. Salve and Kailash Vasdev for the Appellant.
D.V. Sehgal and R.B_. Misra for the Respondent.
The .Judgment of the Court was delivered by F

SEN, J. Special leave granted.

In this case we have to decide whether 'robber flaps' manufactured
by the appellant can be classified under sub-entry (2) of Entry 43 in the G
. Schedule to the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948. The relevant Entry in
the Schedule has been set out in the judgment of the High Court as under:

"(l) Motor vehicles including motor cars, motor taxi cabs, motor
cycles, motor cycle combinations, motor scooters, mopeds,
motorettes, motor omni-buses, motor vans, motor lorries, motor H
828 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 3 S.C.R.

A trucks, jeeps, station wagons and chassis of motor vehicles and
bodies or tankers or motor caravans built or meant for mounting
on cha<sis of motor vehicles, but excluding tractors whether on
wheels or on tracts.

(2) Components, parts and accessories of vehicles specified in
B sub-entry (1) above, including tyres and lubes, batteries and trailers
adapted for use along with the said vehicles, other than such
trailers as are predominantly used along with any other vehicles."

The appellants are manufacturers of rubber flaps which are used for
C giving support to the rubber tubes used in the tyres of motor vehicles. The
contention of the appellant is that such rubber flaps do not fall under any
of the items specified in the Schedule and, therefore, they should be taxed
as unclassified items for which the rate of tax is 8%. The Assessing Officer,
however, taxed the turnover of the rubber flaps under sub-entry (2) of
Entry 43 of the said Schedule, treating the rubber flaps to be an accessory
D of motor vehicles.

The assessee's first appeal to the Statutory Appellate Authority
failed. The assessee thereafter appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal +
noted the argument of the assessee that the flaps were used between the
E wheel rim and the tyre tube of bus, trucks and other heavy vehicles, rubber
flaps were manufactured from rubber and that the assessee had treated
flaps taxable as unclassified item in the category of rubber products. The
Tribunal also fook note of the two judgments placed before it but distin-
guished them on facts. It was pointed out that in the case of Modi Rubber
Ltd. v. State of Kera/a Government, (1991) 81 STC 225, Kerala High Court
F held that rubber flaps came under the category of 'rubber products'. But
in the 0 tier Pradesh Act, there was no separate classification ·of rubber
products as taxable goods. Hence no decision about taxability of rubber
flaps could be taken in the light of the Kerala Judgment.

The case came before the Allahabad High Court for Revision under
G Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The High Court held that "in the face
of the undisputed fact that the article in question is used for the protection
and support of· rubber tubes in the wheels of heavy automobiles there
seems to be no escape from the conclusion that the rubber flap has to be
treated as accessory of motor vehicle. Although there is no direct evidence
H about the sale of the rubber flap in automobile market yet in view of its
UNITED COPIEXv. COMMR. OF S.T. [S.C. SEN, J.] 829.

exclusive use it can be presumed that it is an item which is sold in the A
automobile market." In the case of State of Orissa v. Dunlop India Ltd.,
(1993) 91 STC 379, it has specifically been mentioned· that flap is commer-
ciaJiy· a distinct ideniifiable commodity available for sale in the automobile
niatkef. The High Court upheld the· decision of the Tribunal that the
rubber· flaps were taxable as 'accessory' of motor vehicle. ·
B
This judgmeril is riow under appeal in this Court.
·'
Under sub-section (d) of Section 3kof the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.
a dealer has to· pay tax on the turnover in respect of goods specified in the
Scheduie to· the Ad at such rate as the State Goverruhent may by notifica-
.
fion declare. Sub-section (e) of Section 3A provides for goods other than
c
those ref.erred to in clauses (a); (b), ( c), (d) of Seciion 3A Will be charged
the tax ai the rate of 8%. The conteritiori of the' assessee is that rubber
flaps manufactured by it do n~(faii uµder :U,y of the specifit heads i~ the
Schedule arid, therefore, the only way. to tax rubber flaps is by tak.ing
recourse to sub-ciause
'
(e) of Section 3A(l). ,,.., · D
· Entry 43 of the Schedule is in' two pai'tsc The first part (sub- entry 1)
deals witlicmotot vehicles. Motor cais,.mcitor taxi, cabs, motor cycles, motor
'cyCle''conibinations, motor scooters, mopeds, motor trucks, jeeps, station
wagons, · chassis of. motor vehicles etc. have· all been· included in this ·
sub-entry. The second' part (sub'eniry 2)' relates to compone~ts, parts and E
accessories of vehicles mentioned' iii sub'eiitry (1)' including t}'res, tubes,
batteries' and certain types of trailers~- '· ' '
"I· •.

whether 'rubber. flap', can af all be treated: as an· accessory is a ,
,,. debatable issue. From what has been brotighr on record' rubber flap is a F
prot~ctive d'evice.' It is placed be!Ween1 the'. ttibe and th~ rim, possibly to
save ihe tube from· coming· iiito• direct contact with .overheat~d rims on long
drives. In' the Central EXciS~ & Tariff. Act,. flaps have ~ot been ireated as
accessories of motor vehicles. f'!aps ar¢. taxabfo under, Tariffltem· 40.12
under the Heading. Solid or Cushion :ryres, Interchangeable Tyre .Treads :,
a~d:Tyre Flaps of Rubber. Thai means the flaps wil(not .come und~~ the. G
"t heading "parts and accessories" of motor vehicles in Eritry 87 .05 in Chaplet
87 of tliat Act. It is well accepted that t~e entries in the Schedule to the
Excise Act have been stated in the language of the market place and are
to be understood as the market-people understand them. ·If the flaps are
treated as Car accessories in market parlance, then-. there is no reason to H ·
830 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) 3 S.C.R.

A treat it separately and independently as an item of rubber product in
Chapter 40.

This, however, cannot conclude the dispute raised in this case but is
a good indication of the legislative intent. The flaps have not been under-
stood or treated as accessories of motor vehicles by the legislature in
B another central revenue Act.

Be that as it may, the short question in this case is, having regard to
Entry 43 in the Schedule to the U.P. Sales Tax Act, can it be said that the
'rubber flaps' manufactured by the assessee can come within the phrase
· C 'components, parts and accessories of vehicles specified in sub-entry (1) ?
'Rubber flaps' can hardly be described as an accessory of a vehicle.
Meaning of 'accessory', according to the Webster Comprehensive Diction-
ary, International Edition, is 'a person or thing that aids subordinately; an
adjunct; appurtenance; accompaniment'. The 'rubber flap', which is used
D to protect the tubes of tyres, is not an adjunct, appurtenance or accom-
paniment to a motor vehicle. At the highest, it can be said that it increases
the life of a, tube by keeping it away from direct contact with the rim of a
wheel. Sub-entry (1) does not include tyres and tubes or any other com-
ponents, part or accessory within the description of 'motor vehicles'. Tyres
and tubes have been specifically and separately mentioned in sub-entry (2)
E alongwith 'components, parts and accessories of vehicles specified in sub-
entry (1). The flap may be used as an adjunct to the tyre or an extra piece
of rubber to give additional protection to the tubes. It may, at the highest,
be an accessory of an item falling under sub-entry (2) of Entry 43, but it
cannot be treated. as an accessory of the motor vehicle itself which falls in
F sub-entry (1). Even on the basis of facts as found, il cannot be said that
the 'tyre flaps' will fall within the description of 'components, parts and
accessories of vehicles specified in sub-entry (1}'.

This distinction was .pointed out in the case of Modi Rubber Ltd. v.
G Stale of Kera/a, (1991} 81 STC 225. In that case, Kerala High Court had to
· deal with the following two Entries :

"THE FIRST SCHEDULE

Goods in. respect of which single point tax is leviable under sub-
H section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 5.
UNITED COPIEX v. COMMR. OF S.T. [S.C. SEN, J.] 831

SI. Description of goods Point of levy Rate of tax A
39. Rubber products other At the point of first sale 8
than
_,
those
... specifically. in the State by a· dealer
mentioned Ill this who is liable to tax under "
Schedule. -
section 5.
138. Motor vehicles, motor At the point of first sale 15." B
vessels, motor ·engines, in the State by a dealer :
chassis of motor vehicles, 'who is liable to tax under
trailers, motor bodies section 5.
built on the chassis of
.. inotor vehicles, bodies c
'
;,.'! built for ·motor vessels, or

engines, and spare· parts ..
. "
' and accessories thereof. ' .. .

Dealing with Entry 138, it was observed by the Court : -
-
.~· ·~ ~ ., D
«Counsel for the Revenue submitted that rubber flaps manufac- ·
·' · , tured and sold ·by the revision-petitioner are accessories ·of the
spare parts of motor vehicles, specified in entry 138 of the First

. .. ' -·' .
Schedule to the KGST Act. We are.of the view that entry 138 refers
. ( ' ,. .
to niOtor vehicles, ffiotor .vessels, motor engines, etc., ~nd spare E
" ' . . . ' ., -~' I ' • .
parts and accessories thereof, which means spare parts of moto~
vehicles, motor vessels, motor engines, etc. The words 'accessories
, thereor in entry 138 of the First Schedule have reference to motor
vehicles, ·motor engines,·etc., an_d nOt the 'spare-parts', immediately_
preceding the words occurring in· the entry. The Appellate F
·>( Tribunal was in error in holding that rubber flaps manufactured
and sold by the revision- petitioner are accessories of spare parts
. ' of '.motor yehicles,
•.
coming
. I
~ ,
under- entry 138 of the. First.
- . .
Schedule
. '
to the KGST Act." ·.. ., . ·

In the instant case, Entry 43 has been split up into two parts. The G
first part deals with motor vehicles etc. and the sec0nd part deals with
components, part and accessories of vehicles mentioned in the first part.
Tyres and tubes are included in the phrase 'components, parts and acces-
sories of vehicles'. A protective cover like a rubber flap may be treated as
an accessory of something which is an accessory of the motor vehicle. But H
832 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) 3 S.C.R.

A that will not make the protective cover an accessory of the motor vehicle
itself.

A question may arise whether the accessory of a tyre tube can be
anything but accessory of the motor vehicle itself. In other words the
accessory of a part must of necessity be the accessory of the composite
B whole which is the motor vehicle in this case. This interesting question need
not be pursued in this case. 'Tyres and Tubes' and 'Motor Vehicles' have
been classified separately under Entry 37. That means tyres and tubes have
not been included in motor vehicles. A rubber flap will be, if at all, an
accessory of the tyre or the tube falling in sub-entry (2) and not of motor
C vehicles in sub-entry (1). The Legislature in its wisdom has classified the
tyres and tubes separately in sub- entry (2) and not along with motor
vehicles in sub-entry (1). A flap being an accessory of an article falling
under sub-entry (2) cannot be classified as an accessory of an article falling
in sub-entry (1).

D At the conclusion of the hearing of the case, we were referred to
some amendments made in sub-entry (1) which does not have any material
bearing on the dispute raised in this case. It is not necessary to refer to
these amendments.

We are of the view that this appeal must succeed and is allowed. The
E judgment cif the High Court dated January 18, 1994 is set aside. There will
be no orde.r as to costs.

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4822-25196 OF 1996 (ARISING OUT OF
S.L.Ps. (C)WOS. 11306, 11307, 11308 AND 11309 OF 1994).
F Special leave granted.

In view of our judgment in Civil Appeal No ..... of 1996 ( arising out
of S.L.P. (C) No. 11305 of 1994), the above appeals are allowed. There will
be no order as to costs.
G T.N.A. Appeals allowed.