IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SALES TAX APPLICATION NO. 75 OF 2009 IN REFERENCE APPLICATION NO. 185 OF 2008 WITH SALES TAX APPLICATION NO. 81 OF 2009 IN REFERENCE APPLICATION NO. 184 OF 2008 The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax (VAT)3. ... Applicant. V/s. M/s.Bhima Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Pune. ... Respondent. Ms.Uma Palsuledesai, AGP for the appellant. None for the respondents. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND K.K.TATED, JJ. DATED : 8th January 2010. P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the applicant. None for the respondent. 2. An identical issue was involved in Sales Tax Application No.66/2009 arising out of Reference Application No.190/2008, which was decided by this Court vide order dated 7th August, 2009; wherein the Tribunal was directed to state the case and refer the questions to this Court. In terms of the said order these applications are liable to be allowed. The Tribunal is directed to file statement of case and refer the following two questions for the opinion of this Court. (1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the Appellant dealer is entitled to get the set off in respect of purchases of plant and machinery and parts and components in cash or is eligible to adjust the same against other liabilities instead of adjusting the same against the tax liability to be deferred for the purpose of Rule 31-B of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1959 read with Explanation IV thereto? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding parts and components as not constituting raw materials within the meaning of the said term defined in Explanation-II of Rule 31-B of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules? Both applications are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (K.K.TATED, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)