1968 (8) TMI 167 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether the chaff-cutter (kutti-ki-machine) comes under item (12) mowers of Notification No. 736-3694-V-SR dated April 1, 1959, issued by the State Government as laid down in item 1 of Schedule I appended to the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958? Held that - Appeal dismissed. Kutti-ki-machine or the chaff-cutter is used only after the removal of stems, hay, grass etc. from the earth. Thus the decision of the High Court is correct and must be upheld.

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of notification regarding sales tax exemption for agricultural implements, specifically whether a chaff-cutter falls under the category of "mowers."

The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal regarding the interpretation of a notification issued under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, which exempted certain agricultural implements from sales tax. The central question was whether a chaff-cutter, known as kutti-ki-machine, fell under the category of "mowers" as specified in the notification. The Sales Tax Officer initially assessed the sales of the chaff-cutter, leading to a series of appeals and references to determine its tax liability. The Board of Revenue held that the chaff-cutter was exempt from sales tax as it was considered a "mower." The Commissioner then sought a reference to the High Court, which analyzed the relevant provisions of the Act and the notification. The High Court concluded that the word "mower" in the notification could not be interpreted broadly to include a chaff-cutter based on dictionary meanings and the mowing process definition. The Court emphasized that a "mower" should be understood as a machine for cutting down standing grass, hay, etc., which did not align with the function of a chaff-cutter. The Court noted that the chaff-cutter was used after the vegetation was detached from the earth, unlike a mower used on standing grass. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, ruling that the chaff-cutter did not qualify as a "mower" under the notification and therefore was not exempt from sales tax. The appeal was dismissed, and each party was left to bear their own costs.