1974 (9) TMI 96 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of whether hot tea qualifies as cooked food for sales tax exemption.

Analysis:
The case involved an assessment of a dealer in tea, betels, cold drinks, etc., for sales tax. The main contention was whether tea should be considered cooked food and thus exempt from tax due to being below the taxable limit. The Additional Judge (Revisions) initially held tea as cooked food based on a precedent involving the sale of various food items constituting a meal. However, the court emphasized that the term "meal" should be interpreted in its common parlance meaning, referring to food taken at regular times like breakfast, dinner, or supper. Applying this interpretation, the court concluded that the sale of tea did not constitute a meal and thus qualified as cooked food exempt from tax.

Regarding the State's reliance on a previous case involving the interpretation of "cooked food" in a different context, the court noted that such cases were of limited relevance due to variations in wording across different tax acts. In the case cited, the term "cooked food" was followed by the word "eaten," indicating the intention to cover only solid food. However, the court highlighted that the U.P. Sales Tax Act did not require cooked food to constitute a meal, as in the Madhya Pradesh Act, nor did it specify terms like "eaten" or "consumed" as in the Bombay Act.

The court further analyzed the term "cooked food" in the absence of a specific definition in the U.P. Sales Tax Act. It determined that the term should be understood in its popular sense, as commonly attributed by those familiar with the subject matter. Referring to dictionary definitions of "food" as material that nourishes the body and sustains growth, the court concluded that tea, primarily a stimulant and not taken for nourishment, did not fall under the category of food. Therefore, the court held that hot tea should not be considered cooked food for the purpose of sales tax exemption.

In conclusion, the court answered the reference question by stating that hot tea is not classified as cooked food. Since no representation was made on behalf of the assessee, no costs were awarded. The reference was answered accordingly.