9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uestion as per the order dated December 15, 1977 and held that the applicant was a "dealer". Being aggrieved by the decision, the applicant-dealer preferred appeal before the Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal. Several contentions were raised before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has negatived all the contentions and has confirmed the decision arrived at by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, as per judgment and order dated April 21, 1980. 3.. The applicant-dealer submitted an application for making reference to this Court under section 69(1) of the Act. The Tribunal, after drawing the statement of case referred a question to this Court for its opinion. The question referred and the answer is as follows: Question Answer Whether, on the facts an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods" as defined under the Act. 5.. The contention that the term "business" should be interpreted so as to exclude the activity in relation to newspapers cannot be accepted. Had it been the intention of the Legislature, the Legislature would have expressed itself unambiguously. Be it noted that till August 5, 1985, in the definition of the term "business" the words "but does not include any activity in the nature of mere service or profession" were very much there. Had the Legislature intended to exclude the activity of business in relation to articles which are not "goods" as defined in the Act, the Legislature would have certainly expressed itself by indicating that the business activity in any other article which is not "goods" shal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing also. In the context of the provisions of the Act, even if the term "dealer" is read together with the term "business" as defined in the Act, the term "business " cannot be given restricted meaning so as to exclude the business in articles other than goods as contended by the learned counsel for the dealer. This is so because if the court adopts this course, the court would be legislating and not interpreting the provisions of a statute. Moreover, there is no compelling reason, either from the context of the entire scheme of the Act or from the context of the particular provisions, to give such restricted meaning to the term "business". 7.. Learned counsel for the dealer submitted that "newspaper" is an activity which has relation wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of term "business". 8.. From the judgment of the Tribunal and the record of the reference it is evident that the dealer though engaged in the activity of publication of newspaper called "Lokraj" does purchase taxable goods. In this view of the matter if the business activity in respect of the articles other than "goods" as defined in the Act is not included, while considering other provisions of the Act, it would open royal roads for escaping tax. Therefore it is evident that the interpretation suggested by the learned counsel for the petitioner would lead to absurdity. Such absurd interpretation can never be accepted. 9.. No infirmity in the reasoning adopted and the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal is pointed out to us. 10.. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
