9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ression flowers and plants as appearing in entry No. 47 of Schedule I to the 1941 Act. The applicant in its return determined its taxable turnover at Rs. 26,605.93, paying sales tax of Rs. 243.40 and admitting purchase tax of Rs. 988.02 and turnover tax of Rs. 266.06. But the Commercial Tax Officer (the respondent No. 1) assessed the sales tax at Rs. 11,128.41, purchase tax at Rs. 994.48 and turnover tax at Rs. 5,543.37 and also levied penalty for late submission of return. He disallowed the claim of exemption of sales tax on the sales of green tea but allowed the applicant s alternative claim for the concenssional rate of sale tax on sales of green tea leaves to the registered dealer against declaration forms. Applicant filed an appeal against the assessment order. The appellate authority (respondent No. 2) by his order dated March 27, 1992 affirmed the assessment order negating the applicant s specific plea of exemption from sales tax on the sales of green tea. The appellate authority, however, set aside assessment of taxable specified purchase price and accepted the figure given by the applicant in their return. During the hearing of the revisional application filed against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... green tea leaves (in short, G.T.Ls. ), (2) levy of interest; and (3) imposition of penalty. Shri Chakraborty in tune with the averments made in the application has contended that since sale of plant is not taxable in terms of entry 47 of the First Schedule and G.T.Ls. being parts of plant, there was no question of imposing tax on their (G.T.Ls.) sales. He is also of the opinion that since G.T.Ls. are sold in unprocessed condition, just after plucking, as agricultural produce the applicant is entitled to enjoy tax exemption on such sales under entry 47 of the First Schedule read with section 6 of the 1941 Act. According to him, therefore, the assessing officer was wrong in imposing tax on sales of G.T.Ls. 7.. Entry 47 of the First Schedule runs thus: 47. Flowers and plants . The 1941 Act has not defined the words flowers and plants individually or the expression flowers and plants as a whole. So, to construe the scope of expression we shall have to look to the appropriate canons of interpretation. In a recent decision in case No. RN-83 of 1997 (Gopal Dutta v. West Bengal Commercial Taxes Appellate and Revisional Board [1999] 114 STC 313) this Tribunal has held that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of substance but to their popular meaning, viz., the meaning attached to these expressions by those dealing in them. 10.. Following this principle it can be said that whenever it becomes necessary to determine whether an undefined expression appearing in a statute takes within its fold another expression to which a particular meaning has been attached in the trade to which the latter is associated or by those dealing in them, the said common or trade parlance meaning is to be attributed to the latter expression in deciding the matter. In the case before us, green tea is the subject-matter of dispute. The expression green tea has a meaning of its own in its trade parlance and there is no scope for any confusion. Any one associated with such trade will not ideate G.T.Ls. just as part of comprehensive botanical concept of plants. To them G.T.Ls. are nothing but the raw material for manufacture of tea because that is how they see them in the trade associated with such leaves. He is not interested to know such leaves in the identity as members of vegetable kingdom. In other words, the special utility of such leaves in the tea manu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n flowers and plants did not figure as entry 47 of the First Schedule. Be that as it may, we have already seen that the 1941 Act does not contain any analogous provision like that of the U.P. Act in regard to agricultural produce and that in view of the specific identity of G.T.Ls. in the common parlance and trade parlance such leaves are not covered by entry 47. 12.. It is worth mentioning that while Mr. Chakraborty does not dispute the exigibility of the processed tea to sales tax, he considers green tea leaves inexigible since it should be treated as parts of plant. We are unable to concur with these incongruous views. It is difficult to conceive that G.T.Ls. remain the parts of a plant, in botanical concept losing their specific identity as tea leaves. Mr. K.K. Saha has pointed out that in the case of Cottanad Plantations Limited v. State of Kerala [1992] 85 STC 40 it was held by the Kerala High Court following the decision in the case of Varkey v. Agricultural Income-tax and Rural Sales Tax Officer [1954] 5 STC 348 (Trav-Co.) that expression tea cannot but mean the leaf gathered from tea bush, whether it has or has not been subjected to process which prepares it for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n plant is excluded part of plant is, by implication, excluded from this scope of taxation is not a reasonable one. An examination of the First Schedule would reveal that in the scheme of the First Schedule, parts of plants have, on many occasions, been declared to be tax-free. For example, entry 48 refers to vegetable seeds, entry 55 refers to fresh fruits, entry 58 refers to flower seeds, that is to say, seeds for growing flower plants, entry 60 refers to fodder seeds, green manure seeds and grass seeds, entry 61 refers to betel leaves including packing material and entry 99 refers to paddy seeds and wheat seeds. It is undeniable that seeds and fruits are parts of plants and if the argument that once plants are exempted from tax, such exemption would automatically be available to parts of plants were correct then there would not have been any necessity for including these various entries regarding fruits and seeds in the First Schedule. Further, entry 47 reads flowers and plants . If the contention of the applicant is correct, then there was no necessity of mentioning flowers separately because flower would, in any case be exempt from taxation being part of plants. Inclusion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
