1962 (6) TMI 48 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of "tobacco and all its products" in Schedule V of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.

In the judgment delivered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the issue at hand was the interpretation of the term "tobacco and all its products" as mentioned in Schedule V of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner, a dealer in tobacco and crushed tobacco stalks, contested the imposition of sales tax on crushed tobacco stalks for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59. The petitioner argued that crushed tobacco stalks should be exempt from tax under Schedule V. The court considered the definition of "tobacco" in the Additional Duties of Excise Act and the circumstances under which the items were inserted in Schedule V. The court noted that the legislative intent was to prevent double taxation on commodities subject to additional excise duty under the Central Statute.

The court observed that the expression "tobacco and all its products" in Schedule V needed to be interpreted in conjunction with the definition in the Central enactment. The court highlighted the scheme of the Additional Duties of Excise Act, which aimed to replace state sales tax with excise duties levied by the Central Government. The court emphasized that the amendment to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, was intended to align with the Central Act to avoid double taxation. The court concluded that tobacco stalks fell under the purview of item 7 of Schedule V, exempting them from sales tax under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act.

Furthermore, the court distinguished a previous judgment related to the interpretation of "tobacco and all its products" under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, stating that it did not apply to the present case. The court clarified that crushed tobacco stalks were not subject to levy under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act for the period after 1st April 1958. However, for the prior period, the petitioner would need to prove payment of additional excise duty to benefit from the exemption. The court directed the Sales Tax Department to determine the petitioner's liability based on the court's interpretation. Ultimately, the court dismissed the writ petition, ruling in favor of the interpretation of "tobacco and all its products" in Schedule V.