Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1990 (1) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed the claim on this account and maintained the assessment order. Then a revision was preferred before the West Bengal Commercial Taxes Tribunal which by an order dated April 27, 1989, rejected the claim and confirmed the assessment on the sales of non-cotton yarn waste. The applicant contends that all the authorities below committed error in holding that non-cotton yarn waste is different from non-cotton yarn within the meaning of the 1954 Act. It is alleged that all non-cotton yarns, excluding coir yarn and pure silk yarn but including non-cotton yarn waste were covered by the notification under section 25 of the 1954 Act. 2.. The further case of the applicant is that during the process of manufacture of goods out of non-cotton yarn, short-lengths of such fibres fall on the floor of the mill. Such left-over pieces are collected and sold in the market at cheaper rates. People buying and selling them generally treat and understand them as non-cotton yarn sweepings. Despite the change undergone in regard to length and size no new commercial commodity comes into being. The test of user of the articles is said to be irrelevant in deciding whether such waste comes within non-cotton y .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of "non-cotton yarn" as necessarily encompassing in it "non-cotton yarn waste" under the notification of the 1954 Act. The two Acts were enacted for different purposes by different legislatures and anything provided or not provided in one Act does not give vent to the legislative intent in the other. 6.. According to Webster's New World Dictionary, Second Concise Edition, "yarn" means "a continuous strand or thread of spun wool, silk, cotton, nylon, glass, etc., for weaving, knitting, rope-making, etc." According to the New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition, the word "yarn" in this context means-"continuous strand of fibres grouped or twisted together and used to construct textile fibres". There is, in fact, no controversy at all as to the meaning of "yarn" or, for that matter, "noncotton yarn" as such. The expression "non-cotton yarn" has not been defined either in the 1954 Act, or the Rules made thereunder or the notification concerned. That being the position, as well-settled, while interpreting items in statutes like Sales Tax Acts, resort should be had not to the scientific or technical meaning but to their popular meaning or the meaning attached by those dealing in th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... provisions of a different Act. Moreover, the real issue in that case was fundamentally different. There the question was whether a bunch of spun thread came within the meaning of "cotton yarn". In the instant case, we have a distinct issue to contend with. In the same decision it was also held that cotton bandings and cotton ropes (though made of the same basic material) were not textiles within the meaning of item 4 of the same Schedule. So, we feel that this decision does not lend any assistance in arriving at the true interpretation of the term under our consideration. 8.. Reference was made to the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in [1978] 41 STC 437 (Narayan Venkat Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh). It was held in that case that what was necessary to make an article "cotton fabric" was the manufacture of the same wholly or partly from cotton as stated in item 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and the fact that subsequently such cotton fabrics became rags would not make any difference and such rags would not cease to be cotton fabrics. This decision, again, takes us nowhere, because it is related to a particular definition given i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is understood as a separate article and not as 'cotton' and it may not be possible to decide such disputed question of fact in the writ jurisdiction without taking expert evidence. Although I am inclined to follow the decisions of the Gujarat and Madras High Courts in holding that 'cotton waste' is understood as a distinct and separate article in the commercial parlance and it is not accepted as 'cotton', it is, however, not necessary to decide the said question in this Rule, simply because the commercial tax authorities have decided the case of the petitioner-company on a clear finding that cotton waste is understood as a separate and distinct product in the common parlance and it does not appear to me that such adjudication made on such finding is wholly capricious, perverse or without any reason and as such calls for interference in the writ jurisdiction." To our mind, the foregoing decision finally turned upon the finding of a question of fact that "cotton waste" is understood in the commercial parlance as distinct from "cotton". That being so, it does not help us in any manner. We will have to find out whether the authorities below committed any error in this case, having re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le of interpretation or as understood in English language, we hold the common man understands cotton waste is covered by cotton and cotton yarn waste is covered by the words cotton yarn. " It does not appear to be a settled law that in interpreting items in statutes like Sales Tax Acts, a "common sense" view can be taken. Rather, the settled law is that the meaning attached by the trade circle or those dealing in the article will be the guiding rule of interpretation. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held so and we may refer to one of the recent decisions of that Court in the case of United Offset Process Pvt. Ltd. reported in [1989] 74 STC 81; AIR 1989 SC 622. That case related to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, but it was held that where there was no meaning attributed to the expressions used in the particular enacted statute, then the items in the customs entries should be judged and analysed on the basis of how these expressions were used in the trade or industry or in the market or in other words how these are dealt with by the people who deal in them, provided that there is a market for these types of goods. It was further held that "in incorporating items in the statutes lik .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates