2007 (1) TMI 537 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues: Taxability of artificial silk yarn under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Analysis:
The case involved a revision under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, challenging the Tribunal's order related to the assessment year 1990-91 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The primary issue was the taxability of artificial silk yarn. The dealer claimed that artificial silk yarn should be considered as silk yarn and thus exempt from tax under a specific notification. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that artificial silk yarn is a distinct commodity and should be taxed as an unclassified item. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the dealer, stating that artificial silk yarn should be considered as silk yarn and therefore exempt from tax.

The Revenue contended that artificial silk yarn and silk yarn are different commodities, with only pure silk yarn falling under the category of "silk yarn." However, the court disagreed with this argument, pointing out that the notification did not specify "pure" silk yarn, indicating that the term "silk yarn" should be interpreted in a generic sense to include both artificial and pure silk yarn. The court emphasized that the legislature's intent was to use the term "silk yarn" broadly, without restricting it to only pure silk yarn.

Drawing on a similar case from the Orissa High Court, where the question of whether silk yarn includes artificial silk yarn was addressed, the court found support for its interpretation. The Orissa High Court had ruled that the expression "silk yarn" encompasses both pure silk yarn and artificial silk yarn. Citing the Orissa High Court's decision, the court held that silk yarn should be understood in a generic sense to include both types of yarn. Consequently, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision, concluding that silk yarn encompasses both pure silk yarn and artificial silk yarn. As a result, the revision was dismissed.