ORDER A. R. TIWARI, J. - The assessee IISCO Ujjain Pipe and Foundry Co. Ltd., (formerly known as IISCO Stantan Pipe and Foundry Co. Ltd., Dewas Road, Ujjain), manufactured cast iron spun pipes for the calendar year 1980. It was assessed by the Additional Assistant Commissioner, Ujjain in Case No. 79/80-81 (entry tax) by order dated October 31, 1983. The assessee imported machinery and spare parts worth Rs. 26,60,950. The Additional Assistant Commissioner, Ujjain, levied entry tax on this amount at the rate of 1 per cent (annexure P/1). The assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Ujjain, which was registered as Case No. 11A/83 (entry tax). This appeal was dismissed on November 30, 1984 (annexure P/2). The assessee then preferred a second appeal before the Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, which was registered as No. 38-iv/85-Appeal. This second appeal was also dismissed on April 9, 1985 (annexure P/3). The assessee thereafter, filed an application under section 44 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 read with section 13 of the M. P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (for short, "the Entry Tax Act"), seeking reference on the questions of law as proposed to this Court. The reference was registered as No. 5-iv/85. The Board of Revenue rejected this application on January 20, 1987 (annexure P/4). Therefore, the assessee has applied to this Court under section 44(2)(b) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. 2. On September 3, 1987, this Court had directed issuance of show cause notice to the respondent to show cause as to why the application be not allowed. 3. We have heard Shri L. P. Bhargava, learned Senior Counsel with Shri S. R. Bhargava for the assessee/petitioner and Shri Piyush Mathur, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the respondent-State. 4. The following two questions were proposed before the Appellate Tribunal, i.e., Board of Revenue : "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, legally entry tax could be charged even on machinery and stores which were not for consumption or use as raw material or packing material or in the execution of works contracts. 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case under section 3(1)(b) of the Entry Tax Act the words consumption or use as raw material have wider meaning and includes use of machinery and stores." 5. 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case under section 3(1)(b) of the Entry Tax Act the words consumption or use as raw material have wider meaning and includes use of machinery and stores." 5. The Appellate Tribunal rejected the application for reference on the undernoted conclusion : "A reading of section 3(1)(b) either before amendment or after amendment by inserting 'or incidental goods' does not make the taxability of the goods imported any different. In the present case the assessee never contended that the machineries and parts known as 'incidental goods' imported from outside Madhya Pradesh are not consumed by him. It is not disputed that the machineries and parts thereof imported by the assessee are either consumed or used by the assessee. The words 'consumed' and 'used' has parallel meaning although the word 'use' may still be wider in sense. When the machineries are used in the factory itself, it comes within the meaning of consumption. When the parts are used for replacement of the old parts, the spare parts are thus both used and consumed. The assessee consumed the machineries and spare parts imported and therefore, the consumption by the assessee of these machineries and spare parts fall within section 3(1)(b) of the Entry Tax Act both before and after amendment of the section in 1982. In view of this clear cut provision of section, there is no question of law arising out of the decision of this Tribunal." 6. The questions to be considered are whether the use of machinery can be categorised as consumption and whether parts used to replace old parts can be said to be used and consumed. The entire question veers round the position of the real meaning of the words "consumed" and "used". In our view, what is the real meaning of these words and whether these words can be assigned parallel meanings are manifestly the questions of law. On answer to these questions depends resolution of further controversy whether the entry tax can be charged on machinery and stores (spare parts) which were not intended as raw material or packing material or to be employed in the execution of works contract. The question so posed or opposed are not questions only of facts, but are certainly questions of law required to be referred and answered. 7. The question so posed or opposed are not questions only of facts, but are certainly questions of law required to be referred and answered. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the undernoted two questions are questions of law which are required to be referred to this Court for answer : "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case legally entry tax could be charged even on machinery and stores which were not for consumption or use as raw material or packing material or in the execution of works contracts ? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case under section 3(1)(b) of the Entry Tax Act the words consumption or use as raw material have wider meaning and includes use of machinery and stores ?" 8. Accordingly, we, under section 44(3) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, require the Tribunal to state the case and refer it for our answer. 9. A copy of this order under the signature of the Registrar of this Court shall be forwarded to the Tribunal for compliance. 10. This application is accordingly allowed and directions in terms indicated above are issued. The parties, are however, left to bear their own costs of this application. Application allowed.