ORDER PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA :- This writ petition has been filed against the order dated October 12, 2004 passed by the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, M.P., under section 68 of the Madhya Pradesh Vanijya Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 (for short, "the Act") holding the petitioner liable to pay tax on "fan covers" and "terminal boxes" at the rate mentioned in entry 7, Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act. The petitioner is engaged in business of manufacture and sale of various items. It manufactures and sells "fan covers" and "terminal boxes" (for short, "items in question") to M/s. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd., who uses these items for manufacture of various types of monoblock pump sets which are used for irrigation purpose. The question involved in the present writ petition is whether the items in question manufactured and supplied by the petitioner to M/s. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd., are covered by entry 7, Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act or entry 89 of the First Schedule to the Act and are taxable accordingly. The case of the petitioner is that these items are covered by entry 89 of the First Schedule to the Act, whereas the case of the Department is that these items are covered by entry 7 of Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act and are taxable accordingly. Section 68 of the Act gives power to the Commissioner to make an order determining the rate of tax on any goods if the dealer approaches the Commissioner by way of an application raising the question in respect of rate of tax on such goods. When the dispute in respect of rate of tax on items in question for the assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 arose, the petitioner filed an application under section 68 of the Act before the Commissioner for determining the rate of tax on the items in question. The Commissioner had initially passed the order dated April 8, 1997 which was set aside by this court by order dated December 16, 2003 and matter was remanded back with a direction to pass fresh order. On remand the Commissioner passed the impugned order dated October 12, 2004, holding the items in question taxable under entry 7, Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act. On remand the Commissioner passed the impugned order dated October 12, 2004, holding the items in question taxable under entry 7, Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Commissioner has committed an error in covering the items in question in entry 7 of Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act, by holding these items to be the accessories of the electric motor, whereas these items are the accessories of the monoblock pump sets and are covered by entry 89 of the First Schedule to the Act. The learned counsel appearing for the Department submitted that no error has been committed by the Commissioner while passing the impugned order and Commissioner has rightly held that the items in question are accessories of the electric motor which has an independent existence as goods, therefore, the order of the Commissioner is proper. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties in detail and perused the record. Entry 89 of the First Schedule and entry 7 of Part IV of the Second Schedule existing during relevant time reads as under : "Entry 89 of Schedule I 89. Pumping sets below 10 horse power and accessories thereof. Entry 7, Part IV, Schedule II 7. All machineries or machines worked by electricity, diesel or petrol and parts and accessories thereof excluding those specified in Schedule I and in entry 3 of this part." There is no dispute between the parties that the items in question are accessories but the dispute is on the issue whether these items are accessories of monoblock pump set ? The Commissioner in the impugned order dated December 10, 2004 has also accepted the items in question to be the accessory items, but the Commissioner has held that these items are used in the electric motor which is the part of the pump set and since the electric motor also has a separate existence, therefore, these items are accessories of the electric motor and are covered by entry No. 7 of Part IV of the Second Schedule to the Act. The Commissioner held that the items in question used in electric motor fixed in the pump manufactured by Kirloskar Brothers can be held to be accessory of pump set only when the said electric motor is an item of use in pump set only. The Commissioner held that the items in question used in electric motor fixed in the pump manufactured by Kirloskar Brothers can be held to be accessory of pump set only when the said electric motor is an item of use in pump set only. In the instant case, a perusal of the order passed by the Commissioner indicates that the Departmental Officers on the instructions of the Commissioner had gathered the information from the dealers of these items and on that basis the Divisional Deputy Commissioner had submitted a report to the Commissioner stating that "terminal box" is used for covering the meter, wires and terminals used in the electric motor fixed in the pumping set to protect them and "fan cover" is used to protect the blades of the fan used in the motor. In the report, it was also disclosed that the petitioner had entered into contract with M/s. Kirloskar Brothers under which the petitioner, as per the design and specification of Kirloskar Brothers, manufactures fan covers and terminal boxes and the entire sale of these items manufactured by the petitioner is to Kirloskar Brothers only and these "terminal boxes" and "fan covers" sold by the petitioner are used only in the pump sets manufactured by Kirloskar Brothers. The report shows that in general these "fan covers" and "terminal boxes" may be used in all kind of electric motors, and also in other equipments. Specific case of the petitioner is that it manufactures items in question as per design, specification and requirement of M/s. Kirloskar Brothers and items in question are meant for use in monoblock pump set of 3 to 10 horse power and that Kirloskar Brothers Ltd., does not sell electric motors separately. The petitioner has drawn the attention of this court to the material which was enclosed along with its application under section 68 of the Act. The annexure B enclosed with the application shows that the petitioner manufactures and supplies fan covers and terminal boxes to Kirloskar Brothers as per specification for use as accessory in monoblock pumps. Electric motor on which these two items are fixed is integral part of the monoblock pump and it is not separable from the pump. The annexure B enclosed with the application shows that the petitioner manufactures and supplies fan covers and terminal boxes to Kirloskar Brothers as per specification for use as accessory in monoblock pumps. Electric motor on which these two items are fixed is integral part of the monoblock pump and it is not separable from the pump. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the items in question can also be used as accessories to the electric motor but when the electric motor itself is integral part and inseparable form the monoblock pump then in such a case items in question will not be accessories of the electric motor but accessories of the monoblock pump. It is also worth noting that the items in question supplied by the petitioner to Kirloskar Brothers and used in the electric motor which is integral part of monoblock pump adds to the convenient and safety and comfort to use the monoblock pump and also enhances its appearance by covering the wires and fan covers, and for this reason also they are accessory to the main item, i.e., the monoblock pump. In the monoblock pump the electric motor has no separate existence as independent item therefore, items in question cannot be accessories to electric motor when used in monoblock pump. When these items are used as accessories to the monoblock pump sets of less than 10 horse power capacity they are covered by entry No. 89 of the First Schedule. The accessories used in the pump sets covered by specific entry No. 89 of the First Schedule cannot be held to be covered by entry No. 7, Part IV of the Second Schedule which is a general entry in respect of electric machine, its part and accessories. Thus, we set aside the impugned order of the Commissioner dated October 12, 2004 and hold that the "terminal boxes" and "fan covers" sold by the petitioner to Kirloskar Brothers and used as accessory in monoblock pump sets below 10 horse power mentioned in annexure B/2 of the petitioner's applications under section 68 are covered by entry No. 89 of the First Schedule. We make it clear that if the same items in question are sold by the petitioner for use as accessory or otherwise to some other main item then they will be taxed according to the relevant entry covering such items and accessories. We make it clear that if the same items in question are sold by the petitioner for use as accessory or otherwise to some other main item then they will be taxed according to the relevant entry covering such items and accessories. The petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to cost.