9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (12) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le of food within the meaning of the Food Adulteration Act. The case would therefore have to go back to the High Court for deciding the appeals on merits. Appeal allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . the Municipal Corporation of Delhi carried an appeal to the High Court. The Division Bench before which that appeal came up for hearing, referred three questions (including the two set out above) to a Full Bench for opinion. Thereafter, the Division Bench, merely on the basis of the answers returned by the Full Bench upheld the acquittal and dismissed the appeals. It will be useful at the outset to have a look at the scheme and content of the relevant provisions of the Act. The broad aim of the Act is to ensure the sale and supply of pure food to the public. With that end in view, the Act prevents adulteration of food articles. For the purpose of the Act an article of food is deemed to be adulterated, if it falls under any of the clauses (a) to (1) of s. 2 (i) This definition of "adulterated article of food" is of very wide amplitude. Even a sub-standard article would fall within the mischief of sub-clause (1) "if the quality or purity of the article falls below the prescribed standard or its constituents are present in quantities which are in excess of prescribed limits of variability". Section 7 prohibits a person to "manufacture" for sale or &quo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le of food for a purpose other than for sale does not fall within the mischief of this section. That this is the right construction of the terms "store" and "distribute" in s.16 (1) will be further clear from a reference to s. 10. Under that section, the Food Inspector, to whom the Act assigns a pivotal position for the enforcement of its provisions, is authorised to take samples of an articles of food only from particular persons indulging in a specified course of business activity. The immediate or ultimate end of such activity is the sale of an article of food. The section does not give a blanket power to the Food Inspector to take samples of an article of food from a person who is not covered by any of the sub-clauses of sub-s. 1 (a) of sub-s. 2. The three sub-clauses of sub-section 1(a) apply only to a person who answers the description of a seller or conveyer, deliverer, actual or potential, of an article of food to a purchaser or consignee or his consignee after delivery of such an article to him. Sub-section (2) further makes it clear that sample can be taken only of that article of food which is "manufactured", "stored" or exposed fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the content of the two Acts are entirely different. Under s. 2(h) of the Sales-Tax Act 'sale' has been defined as follows: "In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context,- (h) "sale" means any transfer of property in goods other than goods specified in Schedule for cash or deferred payment or other valuable consideration, but does not include a mortgage, hypothecation, charge or pledge. Explanation-(1) A transfer of goods on hire- purchase or other instalment system of payment shall, notwithstanding that the seller retains a title to any goods as security for payment of the price, be deemed to be a sale." In the Food Act "sale" has been defined as under: "In this Act unless the context otherwise requires- "sale" with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means the sale of any article of food, whether for cash or on credit or by way of exchange and whether by wholesale or retail, for human consumption or use, or for analysis, and includes an agreement for sale, an offer for sale, the exposing for sale or having in possession for sale of any such article, and includes also an attemp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Sales-tax Act, therefore, must be wholly and solely a 'sale' of a taxable article as a distinct entity. If it is inseparably submerged in or amalgamated with a contract for work or services, then it is not possible to fasten it with liability as a sale under the Sales-tax Act, much less can such liability be quantified as an item of taxable turnover for the relevant account year. Such considerations or difficulties do not arise for the purpose of the Food Act. The primary object of the Food Act is to prevent, in the interest of the health of the community, the supply of adulterated foodstuffs by a person as a part of his business activity. The definitions of the term 'sale' have in terms, been made subject to the context of the respective Acts in which they occur. Consequently, in judging whether a transaction is a sale or not, due regard must be had to the purpose, scheme and context of the particular Act under which the question arises. The learned Judges of the High Court appear to have overlooked the important distinction between the connotation of 'sale' for purposes of the Sales-tax Act and the one under the Food Act. For the purposes of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of food for a money consideration, irrespective of whether such consideration is ascertainable, as a distinct item, or is an inseparable element of a consolidated charge for a number of things, would bring it within the mischief of "sale" under s. 2(xiii) of the Food Act. The test suggested by Mr. Sen is not decisive for the purposes of the Food Act. Even so, if such a test is applied consistently with the object of the transaction and the intention of the parties while entering into is nevertheless a commercial transaction. Surely, the dominant object of the transaction and the intention of the parties while entering into the transaction in question was to provide against payment, whole some food for consumption besides residential accommodation and services. Good residential accommodation and good food against one consolidated charge were the main considerations which must have weighed with the parties while entering into this transaction. It is therefore not correct to say that the supply of food under such a composite transaction entered into between the hotelier and his resident customer does not amount to supply of food as an article of commerce. The fact remains t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
