1964 (8) TMI 58 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues Involved:
1. Whether glass sheets fall under entry No. 15 of Schedule I, Part I, to the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947.
2. Interpretation of the term "glass-ware" in the context of the Sales Tax Act.
3. Applicability of common parlance and trade understanding in interpreting tax statutes.
4. Use of the legal maxim noscitur a sociis in interpreting statutory entries.
5. Reliance on dictionary meanings and judicial precedents for interpreting statutory terms.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether glass sheets fall under entry No. 15 of Schedule I, Part I, to the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947:
The Sales Tax Officer assessed the turnover for glass sheets at 7%, holding that glass sheets were covered under "glass-wares" in entry No. 15 of the First Schedule. The assessee contended that glass sheets should not be taxed at this rate, arguing that they are not "glass-ware." Both the first appellate authority and the second appellate authority rejected this contention, referencing a decision of the Nagpur High Court which held that glass sheets are included in "glass-ware." The Tribunal also upheld this view, stating that "glass sheet like glass-ware is an article made of glass and, in our opinion, it would be covered by the comprehensive term glass-ware."

2. Interpretation of the term "glass-ware" in the context of the Sales Tax Act:
The term "glass-ware" in entry No. 15 includes "glass-ware, domestic pottery and china, excepting bottles and lamp and lantern chimneys." The assessee argued that "glass-ware" should exclude sheet glass and plate glass, relying on trade classifications and dictionaries. However, the Tribunal and the High Court found that the term "glass-ware" was intended to be broad and inclusive, covering all articles made of glass. The court noted that the dictionary meanings of "glass-ware" include "articles of glass" or "goods made of glass," and there was no compelling reason to restrict its meaning to exclude sheet glass or plate glass.

3. Applicability of common parlance and trade understanding in interpreting tax statutes:
The assessee argued that the term "glass-ware" should be interpreted as it is understood in common parlance or trade. However, the court emphasized that no evidence was presented to show that "glass-ware" is commonly understood to exclude sheet glass or plate glass. The court referred to previous decisions, including Ramavatar Budhaiprasad v. Assistant Sales Tax Officer, which held that terms in tax statutes should be construed as understood in common parlance, but noted that this principle could not be applied in the absence of evidence.

4. Use of the legal maxim noscitur a sociis in interpreting statutory entries:
The assessee contended that the term "glass-ware" should be interpreted in the context of its association with "domestic pottery and china" in entry No. 15, suggesting that it should be limited to domestic utensils or containers. The court, however, found no compelling reason to apply this maxim, noting that the term "glass-ware" was broad and inclusive, and the exclusion of bottles and lamp and lantern chimneys did not imply a restricted meaning.

5. Reliance on dictionary meanings and judicial precedents for interpreting statutory terms:
The court relied on dictionary definitions and judicial precedents to interpret the term "glass-ware." It referred to decisions of the Nagpur High Court and this Court, which held that "glass-ware" includes all articles made of glass. The court found no reason to deviate from these precedents, noting that the dictionary meanings supported a broad interpretation of "glass-ware."

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the view taken by the Tribunal that entry No. 15 regarding "glass-ware" includes sheet glass and plate glass is correct and justified in law. The reference was answered in the affirmative and against the assessee, with costs to be borne by the assessee.

← Previous Next →