2000 (4) TMI 39 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether a watery coconut could be taxed within the permissible restrictions as also dried coconut that resulted from the drying of the same watery coconut? Held that - There is no reason to state that the watery coconuts in the present cases fall outside the scope of the Act. Thus the High Court was not justified in holding that watery coconut is not taxable under the relevant entry of the Act. In the result, we set aside the order made by the High Court and restore that of the Tribunal. However, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to costs.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment under the Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Prvesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 for entry tax on 'watery coconuts'. Interpretation of the entry at item No. 5 regarding taxation of 'watery coconuts' under the Act.

Issue 1: Assessment under the Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Prvesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 for entry tax on 'watery coconuts'.
The respondent, a dealer in coconuts, was assessed for entry tax on 'watery coconuts' under the Act. The appellant contended that 'watery coconuts' undergo a natural process of ripening to become coconuts and should be taxed under the Act as they fall within the scope of Entry 5. The High Court, however, held that 'watery coconuts' are not taxable under the Act as they are distinct from 'copra' and 'coconut', relying on a previous court decision. The High Court emphasized that the Department must prove that 'watery coconuts' are indeed 'copra' to be liable for tax. The Supreme Court analyzed the entry, the nature of 'oil seeds', and concluded that 'watery coconuts' fall within the ambit of the Act and are taxable under the relevant entry.

Issue 2: Interpretation of the entry at item No. 5 regarding taxation of 'watery coconuts' under the Act.
The Supreme Court examined the phrase 'Oilseeds, that is to say' in the entry and its descriptive, enumerative, and exhaustive nature. It was established that 'oil seeds' encompass seeds capable of yielding oil, including 'watery coconuts' that yield oil despite containing watery substances. The Court referred to a previous case to distinguish between 'tender coconuts' and 'dried coconuts', emphasizing that 'watery coconuts' eventually become 'dried coconuts' or 'copra'. The Court criticized the High Court's interpretation and ruled that 'watery coconuts' are taxable under the Act. The judgment set aside the High Court's order and reinstated that of the Tribunal, with no costs awarded in the case.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's judgment clarified the taxation of 'watery coconuts' under the Madhya Pradesh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Prvesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976, emphasizing that 'watery coconuts' fall within the scope of the Act's entry and are liable for taxation. The Court's detailed analysis of the entry's interpretation, the nature of 'oil seeds', and previous legal precedents led to the decision to overturn the High Court's ruling and uphold the Tribunal's decision.