JUDGMENT : Saumitra Dayal Singh, J. 1. Heard Ms Pooja Talwar, learned counsel for the applicant-assessee and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party-revenue. 2. The present revision has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, Allahabad Bench in Second Appeal No.102 of 2004 for A.Y. 1999-2000. The Tribunal has upheld the order passed by the Assessing Authority and the First Appellate Authority by which demand of entry tax has been created and confirmed on the assessee with respect to import of certain machinery and machinery parts. According to the assessee, the value of the individual machinery and the individual spare parts was less than Rs.10,00,000/-, and therefore, such transactions were not taxable under Schedule Entry No.2 of the U.P. Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 3. The present revision has been heard on the following question of law:- "Whether any entry could have been levied on the assessee for import of machineries and spare parts individually valued at less than Rs.10,00,000/-?" 4. During A.Y. 1999-2000, the assessee was engaged in the manufacture of polyester filament yarn at its factory establishment inside the local area at Allahabad. For the purposes of carrying out such manufacturing activity, the assessee further claimed to have imported into the local area at Allahabad, diesel generator sets and their spare parts. These imports appear to have been made against seven disputed Form-31 under the UP Trade Tax Act, 1948 bearing nos.2793039, 0028137, 2792732, 4115959, 4116219, 4117251 and 4118229. 5. While first three Forms had been utilized to import diesel generator sets and their spare parts from one Rai & Sons Private Ltd, New Delhi, the next three Form-31 had been utilized to import spare parts from M/S Khimjee Punja. The seventh Form-31 had been utilized to import spare parts from another dealer. 6. Since the total value of machinery and spare parts imported against each Form-31, noted above, was in excess of Rs.10,00,000/-, vide assessment order dated 04.03.2002, the Assessing Officer choose to impose entry tax on the entire value of goods imported against each of the disputed Form-31. The seventh Form-31 had been utilized to import spare parts from another dealer. 6. Since the total value of machinery and spare parts imported against each Form-31, noted above, was in excess of Rs.10,00,000/-, vide assessment order dated 04.03.2002, the Assessing Officer choose to impose entry tax on the entire value of goods imported against each of the disputed Form-31. Upon first appeal being filed by the assessee, the First Appellate Authority observed that under the Entry Tax Act, entry tax can be imposed only if the value of the individual machinery imported exceeded Rs.10,00,000/- or the value of the individual spare parts imported exceeded Rs.10,00,000/- and not otherwise. 7. Therefore, the First Appellate Authority vide his order dated 16.08.2002 allowed the assessee's appeal and remitted the matter to the Assessing Authority to pass a fresh order. Upon remand, by his order dated 25.08.2003, the Assessing Authority again concluded that the composite value of the machinery and spare parts was in excess of Rs.10,00,000/- in case of four import declaration forms and thus against import Declaration Form nos. 4115959, 4117251, 4118229 and 4116219. The assessee's appeal against the aforesaid order has been dismissed by the Tribunal by the impugned order. Hence this revision. 8. Upon consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard and is being decided finally at the admission stage itself. 9. The Tribunal appears first to have accepted the principle relied upon by the assessee that entry tax could be imposed only in case the total value of the machinery imported exceeded Rs.10,00,000/-. To that extent, there is no dispute between the parties. However, while applying that principle, the Tribunal has reached a conclusion that wherever the total value of the spares imported by way of single transaction i.e. against the single form import declaration Form-31 exceeded Rs.10,00,000/-, the same would be subjected to tax under the Act. On that test, the Assessing Officer has considered the material on record and imposed the tax on the four transactions where the spares imported against the single declaration form exceeded Rs.10,00,000/-. 10. On that test, the Assessing Officer has considered the material on record and imposed the tax on the four transactions where the spares imported against the single declaration form exceeded Rs.10,00,000/-. 10. Relying on the Schedule Entry 2 of the Act and the circular issued by the Commissioner of Trade Tax dated 16.02.2000, learned counsel for the assessee would submit, no tax could have been imposed on the assessee merely because more than one number of the same spare part had been imported by the assessee against a single import declaration form. Thus, referring to import declaration form-F/FF 4116219, it has been submitted that the assessee had imported 80 pieces of Spinnerets which are used to measure the thickness and consistency of the filament yarn manufactured by it. Similarly, relying on declaration form-F/FF 4115959, it has been submitted that the assessee had only imported numbers of other spare parts for textile machinery. Also, reliance has been placed on the other two import declaration forms utilised to the same effect. Thus, it has been submitted that the assessee did not import any single spare part of value more than Rs.10,00,000/- and there is no finding that it had in fact made such import. Merely because the total value of the spare parts imported through one import declaration form exceeded Rs.10,00,000/- though the identity of each spare thus imported was different, no taxable event could arise in view of the clear language of the taxing entry. 11. Reliance has been placed on the reasoning of this Court in the case of M/S. Skipper Steels Ltd. Mall Avenue Road Lucknow Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P., Lucknow,2019 UPTC 101 124 12. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel would submit that the words "machinery and spare parts" of machinery appearing in the taxing entry would include the value of entire goods that may be imported by the assessee, with the only restriction that the parts being thus imported must be such as may be used in the machinery. Reliance has been placed on the another decision of this Court in M/S Door Sanchar Maha Prabandhak, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Vs Commissioner Commercial Taxes U.P. Lucknow in Trade Tax Revision No.75 of 2010 and connected matters decided on 02.11.2012. 13. Reliance has been placed on the another decision of this Court in M/S Door Sanchar Maha Prabandhak, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Vs Commissioner Commercial Taxes U.P. Lucknow in Trade Tax Revision No.75 of 2010 and connected matters decided on 02.11.2012. 13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in the first place, it could be useful to extract the taxing entry being Entry 2 to the Schedule of the Act. It reads as under:- "2. Machinery and spare parts of machinery valuing Rupees ten lakhs or more." 14. While the language of the Entry itself clearly indicates that entry tax may be imposed only on such machinery as may be imported into a local area of value of more than Rs.10,00,000/- or on a spare part of machinery that may be imported in such local area of value more than Rs.10,00,000/- and not on the composite value of all machinery or of spare parts that may be imported either by way of a single transaction or multiple transactions during the entire year, that position was further made clear by the Commissioner himself while issuing the circular dated 16.03.2000. In that circular, referring to the Schedule Entry noted above, it has been clarified : ^^mijksDr ls Li"V gS fd e'khuksa rFkk e'khuksa ds Qkyrw iqtsZ ij rHkh izos'k dj ns; gksxk tcfd bafMfotqvy e'khujh ;k e'khu ds iqtsZ dk ewY; :10 yk[k ls vf/kd gksA bl izdkj ,d fof'k"V Js.kh ds e'khujh vFkok e'khu ds Qkyrw iwtksZ ij izos'k dj ns; gksus dk izkfo/kku fd;k x;k gSA bldk rkRi;Z ;g dnkfi ugha gS fd tks O;kikjh dj fu/kkZj.k o"kZ esa dqy feykdj :10 yk[k ;k mlls vf/kd ewY; dh e'khu Ø; djsxk mls ,slh lHkh e'khuksa ij dj ns; gksxkA d`i;k mijksDrkuqlkj dk;Zokgh fd;k tkuk lqfuf'pr djsA^^ 15. Thus, under the schedule entry 2, entry tax has been imposed on a machinery that may be imported into a local area of value more than Rs.10,00,000/- or a single spare part of a machinery whose value may be more than Rs.10,00,000/-. Thus, under the schedule entry 2, entry tax has been imposed on a machinery that may be imported into a local area of value more than Rs.10,00,000/- or a single spare part of a machinery whose value may be more than Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, by way of example (only), if value of a single machinery is more than Rs.15,00,000/-, the same would remain taxable for the purposes of the Entry Tax Act, even if the assessee chooses to knock down such machinery before its import and cause its entry into the local area in three different parts with value of each part at Rs.5,00,000/-. In that event, the machinery imported being one and it being valued at more than Rs.10,00,000/-, the same would remain taxable for the purposes of the Act and it would not be for the assessee to break down its value so as to take the machinery outside the taxing entry. By way of corollary, if 16 parts of different machinery or 15 pieces of one part of a machinery are imported in the State of U.P., each of which is valued, say at Rs.1,00,000/-, the fact that their composite value exceeds Rs.10,00,000/- would not make them fall within the taxing entry. In that case, they would continue to be identified as individual spare parts and not taxable since the value of each individual part would be below the threshold limit of Rs.10,00,000/-. 16. The interpretation made by the revenue authority and the appellate authorities would allow the parties to alter and present a transaction as taxable or otherwise by creating artificial bifurcations and unity (amongst different transactions), so as to avoid or create existence of a taxable event. Even otherwise, the rule of strict construction of taxing entry suggests that the taxing entry seeks to impose entry tax on input of machinery of value more than Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore the valuation of the taxable goods is determinative of their taxability or otherwise. Once the taxing entry identifies the total of value of a single machine (which would be more than the sum total of value of it's parts), as the factor giving rise to it's taxability, the same test of value would determine the taxability or otherwise of the spare parts. Otherwise, it would lead to contradictory results. This position has also been made plain by the circular noted above. 17. Otherwise, it would lead to contradictory results. This position has also been made plain by the circular noted above. 17. The same view has been taken by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of M/S. Skipper Steels Ltd. Mall Avenue Road Lucknow Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P., Lucknow (supra) with which I am in full agreement. 18. Insofar as the decision relied by the learned Standing Counsel is concerned, the same is found to be wholly distinguishable on facts inasmuch as in that case the assessee had established a telephone exchange and imported certain parts and equipment for the same. The telephone exchange would be one machinery. The finding of the Court in that case is based principally on the value of the telephone exchange and equipment being more than a crore and it was also reasoned that they could not function independently. Therefore the composite value was taken was considered for the purpose of taxation. 19. While, I may not entirely agreeable with the view of the Court taken in M/S Door Sanchar Maha Prabandhak, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (supra) even on the merits of that reasoning insofar as no finding recorded in the present case that the spare parts being imported were to be used in the single machinery and that they had no independent existence that judgment is of help to the revenue. 20. Accordingly, the question of law raised is answered thus: The taxing entry 2 of the schedule to the entry tax act would apply and entry tax may be imposed only on import of such single machinery whose value exceed Rs.10,00,000/- or on such individual spare parts of any machinery whose value exceeds Rs.10,00,000/-. The composite value of different machinery and spare parts being compositely imported would not be relevant to determine existence of a taxable event. 21. In view of the above, the answer thus given the matter remitted to the Assessing Authority to examine it in light of the decision made above and to pass fresh assessment order, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, on the basis of evidence and material already available on record. 22. Accordingly, the present revision is allowed.