1965 (9) TMI 45 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Identification of whether pind-khajur is classified as dry fruit, preserved fruit, or fresh fruit for sales tax assessment.

Analysis:
The case involves a reference under section 44 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, regarding the classification of pind-khajur as either dry fruit, preserved fruit, or fresh fruit for sales tax purposes. The assessee, a dealer in dry fruits and kirana, was assessed for sales tax on the turnover of sales of pind-khajur. The Sales Tax Officer and Assistant Commissioner considered pind-khajur as dry fruit under entry No. 24 of Schedule II, while the Sales Tax Tribunal classified it as a preserved fruit taxable under the residuary entry of Schedule II. The Tribunal's decision was based on the understanding that pind-khajur, being the pulpy fruit of the date-palm treated with sugar to prevent decay, did not fit the definitions of fresh or dry fruit. The Tribunal's interpretation was further supported by subsequent amendments to the Act explicitly including pind-khajur in the definition of dried fruits. The Court analyzed the common parlance understanding of fruits and dry fruits, emphasizing that pind-khajur, due to its preservation process, did not fall under the categories of fresh or dry fruits but was correctly classified as a preserved fruit.

The Court referred to the amendments made by the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, which specifically included pind-khajur in the definition of dried fruits in Schedule II. The use of the term "including" in the amended entries highlighted the legislative intent to broaden the scope of dry fruits to encompass pind-khajur. The Court reasoned that without this artificial inclusion, pind-khajur would not naturally be considered a dry fruit. Therefore, the Court concluded that pind-khajur should be classified as preserved fruit based on its preservation process and the legislative amendments explicitly incorporating it into the category of dried fruits. Consequently, the sales of pind-khajur were deemed taxable under the residuary entry of Schedule II. The Court answered the reference by affirming that pind-khajur is to be classified as preserved fruit for sales tax assessment purposes, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.