9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (9) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arte assessment order exercising powers under section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act read with section 10 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act. The assessing authority held that the sale of foils by the petitioner is not covered under the head "nonferrous sheets" as mentioned in the notification dated December 31, 1975, issued by the State Government under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act and the petitioner was accordingly assessed on the inter-State sale of aluminum foils/ sheets at 4 per cent and not at 1 per cent as per the notification dated December 31, 1975. 2.. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order, the petitioner challenged the same by filing an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Jodhpur, c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el for the petitioner that the notification dated December 31, 1975, is wide enough to include aluminium foil in the item "sheet"d; scope and arnbit of the meaning to the item, cannot be restricted on the basis of its use or the manner of production. The notification covers all types of sheets, thus, foil, which is nothing but a thin sheet is included in the notification. On the other hand, the counsel for the department, urged that the foil is a different commodity than sheet as is clear from the later notification issued by the State on June 13, 1985, providing exemption from sales tax over the foil for the period of 5 years. For the proper consideration of the arguments advanced by the counsel appearing for the respective parties, it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons sheets, circles and tubinus. The reduced rate of sales tax which is payable on these items is 1 per cent. The question in this case is whether the aluminium foils manufactured by the petitioner are the non-ferrous sheets. The nomenclature is not determinative or conclusive of the nature of the goods, which will have to be determined by the application of certain well established principles, guiding the matter. The canon of construction to be involved in these types of statute has been repeatedly enunciated in several decisions of the apex Court. In Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal Co. v. State of Madhya Pradesh [1988] 68 STC 324 (SC) (1988) Supp SCC 232, their Lordships have observed as under: "In a taxing statute words which are not technical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n a popular meaning. In the present case, the Tribunal has observed that no evidence has been led by the parties so as to understand the popular meaning of "sheet" by the persons carrying on business in non-ferrous metal and thus, remanded the matter giving opportunity to the parties to lead evidence on that point. In my considered opinion, the approach of the Tribunal is correct. Whether the foil is included in the commodity mentioned in the notification, depends on the facts proved in this case. I do not find any illegality committed by the Tribunal in remanding the matter, where both the parties will have opportunity to lead evidence and establish the fact as to how the commodity "foil" is understood by the persons dealing with the commo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
