1960 (3) TMI 42 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Determination of whether linseed oil is considered edible oil within the meaning of a specific notification.

Analysis:
The judgment involves ten connected sales tax references where the main issue is whether linseed oil should be classified as an edible oil or a non-edible oil for tax calculation purposes. The Sales Tax Officer initially classified linseed oil as non-edible, while the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax considered it as edible based on a report on the Marketing of Linseed in India. However, the Judge (Revisions) disagreed and held that linseed oil is non-edible. The Judge (Revisions) based his decision on the criterion of common usage in the State of Uttar Pradesh, stating that the mere possibility of an oil being used as food does not automatically make it an edible oil. The High Court disagreed with this interpretation, emphasizing that the term "edible" should be understood as fit to be eaten as food, as established in previous legal interpretations. The Court highlighted that common usage in the State should not be the sole criterion for determining edibility, as it could lead to absurd conclusions regarding various food items like pistachios. The Court also referred to a previous case where linseed oil was considered an article of food under a local Act, supporting the view that linseed oil is fit for consumption and thus qualifies as an edible oil. Consequently, the Court ruled that linseed oil is indeed an edible oil, overturning the Judge (Revisions)'s decision.

In conclusion, the High Court answered the question in the affirmative, declaring linseed oil as an edible oil. The dealers involved in the references were awarded costs, and the judgment was in favor of considering linseed oil as fit for consumption and therefore classified as an edible oil for tax purposes.