9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 662X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A (1) 2nd proviso (vi) of the APGST Act, 1957 on the sales of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by Small-Scale Industrial Units? - HELD THAT:- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 9 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, the State Government issued Notification-I in G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 granting exemption from the tax payable under A.P.G.S.T Act on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by the Small-Scale Industries (SSI) - G.O. Ms. No. 1091 thus grants exemption on the sale of the Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units. The Pulp Moulded Egg Trays which are manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units, only, call for exemption. If not manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units it would not be exempted. In THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VERSUS SHRI VILE PARLE KELVANI MANDAL ORS. [ 2022 (2) TMI 720 - SUPREME COURT ] , the question was whether the charitable educational institution was entitled to the exemption from payment of electricity duty post 01.09.2016 i.e. as per the provisions of the Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 2016? The Hon ble Apex Court while answering the aforesaid question/issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... WAN SINGH AND ORS. [ 2019 (2) TMI 2105 - SUPREME COURT] the Hon ble Apex Court held that it is a well settled principle of interpretation that when the words of a statute are clear and unambiguous, there cannot be a recourse to any principle of interpretation other than the rule of literal construction. In Dr.(Major) Meeta Sahai v. State of Bihar [ 2019 (12) TMI 1672 - SUPREME COURT ] the Hon ble Apex Court held that it is a settled canon of statutory interpretation that as a first step, the Courts ought to interpret the text of the provision and construct it literally. Provisions in a statute must be read in their original grammatical meaning to give its words a common textual meaning. However, this tool of interpretation can only be applied in cases where the text of the enactment is susceptible to only one meaning. Nevertheless, in a situation where there is ambiguity in the meaning of the text, the Courts must also give due regard to the consequences of the interpretation taken. The notification in clear words grants exemption on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays which are manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units. So the exemption is on the sale if the commodity is man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e not mentioned. What was mentioned was with reference to the industrial unit, so long as it was (i) a large or medium scale industry, and (ii) it manufactured and sold goods within the five years of its going into production - the exemption vide G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 is not a general exemption within the meaning of Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. It cannot be covered under the expression generally under Section 8 (2A) read with its explanation. Exemption under G.O. Ms. No. 1091 may be available under the State Act, Section 5-A (i) (vi), but the same would not be available under the Central Sales Tax Act, Section 8 (2A), only because exemption is available under the State Act. All the Tax Revision Cases are dismissed. - HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N For the Petitioner : Sri T.C.D Sekhar, Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax For the Respondent : Sri S. Suribabu, learned counsel, representing Sri S.R.R. Viswanath, learned counsel. COMMON JUDGMENT: (PER HON BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI) Heard Sri T.C.D Sekhar, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax for petitioners and Sri S. Suribabu, l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions have been advanced in all the aforesaid revision we proceed to decide all the revisions by this common judgment. 6. The Deputy Commissioner (CT) took the view that the respondent was a Small-Scale industry unit, but the commodity sold was not manufactured by the respondent unit. The Pulp Moulded Egg Trays were purchased by the respondent from the other registered dealers. The assessee unit not being a manufacturer, exemption on sales turnover vide G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 was not applicable. The turnover was liable to tax under Section 5-A of the APGST Act, 1957. It further observed that, allowing exemption by the CTO was prejudicial to the interest of the State revenue. The contention of the dealer respondent that the sale of Egg Trays are generally exempted under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act vide G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 was rejected. The Deputy Commissioner (CT) took the view that the exemption only applied to the Small-Scale industries unit (SSI), manufacturing and selling such commodity. 7. The Appellate Tribunal took the view that the exemption vide G.O. Ms. No. 1091 was a general exemption and not conditional, observing that when the exemption i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5) 98 STC 144 (APHC) v) Sri Venkateshwara Hybrid Seeds Co., Adoni vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (1997) 24 APSTJ 51 (APHC) vi) Vinod Solvent Extracts Pvt Ltd Vs. State of A.P. (1989) 8 APSTJ 148 (APHC). vii) Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jammu and Kashmir and other Vs. Pine Chemicals Ltd and others (1995) 96 STC 355 (SC). Questions of law for determination: 13. The questions of law to be decided are as under:- A. Whether the G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act, 1957 grants general exemption, from levy of turnover tax under Section 5A (1) 2nd proviso (vi) of the APGST Act, 1957 on the sales of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by Small-Scale Industrial Units? B. Whether the exemption from levy of tax under G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by S.S.I is available to the manufacturing unit alone or it would also be available to the sales of such commodity by other Small-Scale Industrial Units? C. Whether the Respondent Assessee-Dealer is entitled for exemption from levy of tax under Section 8(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act 1956? Analysis: 14. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion in the rate of tax notified under sub-section (1) (a) may extend to the whole of the State or to any specified area or areas therein; (b) may be subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified in the notification, including conditions as to licenses and license fees. 17. Section 9 of the APGST Act provides for the power of the State Government to notify the exemptions and reductions of tax or interest. Section 9 (1)(i) refers to the exemption on the sale or purchase of any specified class of goods at all points or at any specified point or points in series of sales or purchases by successive dealers. Section 9 (1)(ii) refers to any specified class of persons, in regard to the whole or any part of their turnover. Section 9(2) provides for the exemption from tax or interest or reduction in the rate of tax or interest notified in Sub-Section (1), which (a) may extend to the whole of the State or to any specified area or areas therein and (b) may be subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified in the notification, including conditions as to license and license fees. 18. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 9 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cability with reference to the entitlement of the assessee or the rate of tax, it was observed that, the principles were stated in clear terms that, the question as to whether a subject falls in the notification or in the exemption clause has to be strictly construed; and once the ambiguity or doubt is resolved by interpreting the applicability of exemption clause strictly, the Court may construe the exemption clause liberally. 23. Referring to the Constitution Bench decision in CCE v. Hari Chand Shri Gopal (2011) 1 SCC 236 , the Hon ble Apex Court in Ramnath and Company (supra) in para 16.3 and 16.4 observed as under: 16.3. In view of above and with reference to several other decisions, in Dilip Kumar Co., the Constitution Bench summed up the principles as follows:- 66. To sum up, we answer the reference holding as under: 66.1. Exemption notification should be interpreted strictly; the burden of proving applicability would be on the assessee to show that his case comes within the parameters of the exemption clause or exemption notification. 66.2. When there is ambiguity in exemption notification which is subject to strict interpretation, the benefit of such ambiguity cannot be cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax, the person liable to pay tax and the rate at which the tax is to be levied have to be interpreted and construed strictly. If there is any ambiguity in any of these three components, no tax can be levied till the ambiguity or defect was removed by the legislature. However, in case of exemption notification or clause, same is to be allowed based wholly by the language of the notification, and exemption cannot be gathered by necessary implication, or on a construction different from the words used by reference to the object and purpose of granting exemption. 13. Further it is for the assessee to show by construction of the exemption clause/notification that it comes within the purview of exemption. The assessee/citizen cannot rely on ambiguity or doubt to claim benefit of exemption. The rationale is not to widen the ambit at the stage of applicability. However, once the hurdle is crossed, the notification is constructed liberally [see CCE v. Parle Exports (P) Ltd. [CCE v. Parle Exports (P) Ltd., (1989) 1 SCC 345 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 84] and Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd. [Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd., (1990) 4 SCC 256 : 1990 SCC (Tax) 422]] Thus, distinction can be made betw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee cannot claim benefit of exemption, on the principle that in case of ambiguity a taxing statute must be construed in his favour, for an exception or exemption provision must be construed strictly. 16. In Giridhar G. Yadalam [Giridhar G. Yadalam v. CWT, (2015) 17 SCC 664], it is observed and held that in a taxing statute, it is the plain language of the provision that has to be preferred where language is plain and is capable of one definite meaning. It is further observed that the strict interpretation to the exemption provision is to be accorded. It is observed that the purposive interpretation can be given only when there is some ambiguity in the language of the statutory provision or it leads to absurd results. In para 16, it is observed and held as under : (SCC p. 671) 16. We have already pointed out that on the plain language of the provision in question, the benefit of the said clause would be applicable only in respect of the building which has been constructed . The expression has been constructed obviously cannot include within its sweep a building which is not fully constructed or in the process of construction. The opening words of clause (ii) also become importa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of exemption. The rationale is not to widen the ambit at the stage of applicability. However, once the hurdle is crossed, the notification is constructed liberally. Distinction has been made between the substantive requirements that require strict compliance noncompliance of which would render the assessee ineligible to claim exemption, and the procedural or compliance provision which can be interpreted liberally. The Hon ble Apex Court observed that the statutory conditions for grant of exemption can neither be tinkered with nor diluted. The exemption notification must be interpreted by their own wordings, and where the wordings of notification with regard the construction are clear, it has to be given effect to. If on the wordings of the notification benefit is not available, then the court would not grant benefit by stretching the words of the notification or by adding words to the notification. To interpret the exemption notification one should go by the clear, unambiguous wordings thereof. 27. In the context of exemption notification there is no new room for intendment. Regard must be to the clear meaning of the words. Claim to exemption is governed wholly by the lang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and therefore as per Circular No. 89/7/2006 dated 18.12.2006, the respective Market Committees are exempted from payment of service tax on such activities, which are in the nature of statutory activity. 3.2 It is further submitted by Shri Khurana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants respective Market Committees that even the fees collected/recovered by the respective Market Committees on renting/leasing the land/shop will be deposited in the Market Committee Fund and the same shall be ultimately used for the betterment of the market area. It is submitted therefore that when the respective Market Committees are the public authorities constituted under the Statute Act, 1961 and when they perform the statutory duty / statutory function of the allotment/renting/leasing of land/shop, the respective Market Committees are entitled to the exemption provided under the 2006 circular. 30. In Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata vs. Rupa Co., Ltd (2004) 6 SCC 408, the Hon ble Apex Court observed that the exemption notification has to be construed strictly but that does not mean that the object and purpose of the Notification is to be lost sight of and the wording used therein i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yarn in plain reels effected to the registered dealers in the State. It was held that there was no other category, other than the registered dealers in the State, to whom the hank yarn in plain reels could be sold, as all the dealers to whom it could be sold were to be the registered dealers. It was also held that there was no condition or restriction as to the exemption available in respect of sales effected to the registered dealers in the State. The exemption therefore was a general exemption in the State. The exemption under the Central Sales Tax Act was also extended to inter-state sales by virtue of the provisions of Section 8 (2A) of CST Act. 33. In Anandi Roller Flour Mils Ltd. (supra) vide G.O. Ms. No. 377 Rev. dated 02.05.1991 exemption was granted from the levy of the tax under the State Act on the sale and purchase of wheat or wheat products by the Roller Flour Mills within the State for a period of five years with effect from the date of publication of the notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette. The notification was issued under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act. This Court held that the State Government granted exemption to all the Roller Flour Mills on the wheat an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or a period of five years from the date of the notification. This exemption is to a class of dealers as provided under Clause (ii) of Section 9 (1) and there is no reference to any conditions or circumstances as provided under Clause (b) of Section 9(2) under which exemption is available. Therefore, in the absence of any such conditions or circumstances, under which exemption is available, the exemption shall be construed as general. 36. Placing reliance on the said judgment, the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent is that in G.O. Ms. No. 1091, any restriction or condition as in Sub-Section (2) of Section 9, not having been imposed the G.O. Ms. No. 1091 granted a general exemption. 37. In Pinakini Seeds v. State of A.P. (1995) 98 STC 144 (AP) G.O. Ms. No. 604 Rev.(S), dated 09.04.1981 was considered as a notification granting general exemption. It was observed that the requirements in G.O. Ms. No. 604 viz., the seeds certified and truthfully labeled are not cumulative requirements and that any one of these categories would qualify for exemption and that the exemption granted under G.O. Ms. No. 604 was a general exemption and as such it qualified for exempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The exemption for a limited period or for specified class of persons or goods or at one or more or all points of sale or purchase, could not be construed as restricted or conditional exemption, as the same could be provided in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 9 under clauses (i) or/and (ii). 42. In the present case, the G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 is under consideration which was not under consideration in the aforesaid cited judgments. Therefore, whether the notification of G.O. Ms. No. 1091, issued under Section 9 (1) falls under the general exemption for the purposes of the APGST Act is to be considered, independently, applying the principle of law, the precedents in various judgments, depending inter alia upon the language of the Government Order as also other relevant factors. 43. Section 5 A(1)(vi) of APGST Act uses the expression generally, under sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the said Act . The expression generally has not been defined in the Act, 1957. It has also not been explained in the APGST Act, like under Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The expression generally , however, refers to Sub-Section (1) of Section 9 of the Act, 1957. Sub-Section (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -section (1) may be subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be specified in the notification, including conditions as to licences and licence fees. But, as any such restriction or condition as contemplated under sub-section (2) clause (b) has not been imposed and the notification refers only to sub-section (1) of Section 9, it would be a notification of general exemption. Section 9 (1) is the provision under which a notification granting exemption from tax can be issued. The exemption, only because it refers to a specified good or specified person, i.e., pulp moulded egg trays manufactured by the Small-Scale Industrial Units, cannot be considered as a restriction or condition under Section 9 (2), to avail the benefit of exemption from tax, as Clauses (i) (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 9 in their terms contemplate for grant of exemption in respect thereto. A notification issued under Section 9 (1) may either be referable to Clause (i) or (ii) or both but unless it is subject to the condition or restriction under sub-section (2) of Section 9 it would be granting an exemption generally for the purposes of Section 5A (1) (vi) of APGST Act. 46. The question whether G.O. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cal meaning to give its words a common textual meaning. However, this tool of interpretation can only be applied in cases where the text of the enactment is susceptible to only one meaning. Nevertheless, in a situation where there is ambiguity in the meaning of the text, the Courts must also give due regard to the consequences of the interpretation taken. Paras-20 and 21 read as under: 20. It is a settled canon of statutory interpretation that as a first step, the courts ought to interpret the text of the provision and construct it literally. Provisions in a statute must be read in their original grammatical meaning to give its words a common textual meaning. However, this tool of interpretation can only be applied in cases where the text of the enactment is susceptible to only one meaning. [ Nathi Devi v. Radha Devi Gupta, (2005) 2 SCC 271, para 13.] Nevertheless, in a situation where there is ambiguity in the meaning of the text, the courts must also give due regard to the consequences of the interpretation taken. 21. It is the responsibility of the courts to interpret the text in a manner which eliminates any element of hardship, inconvenience, injustice, absurdity or anomaly. [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable to the assessee in question, a liberal approach is to be adopted by the Court in construing the language, such as to allow the benefit to be reaped by the beneficiary in question ( Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd. [Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd., (1990) 4 SCC 256 : 1990 SCC (Tax) 422] ). 53. Recently, in AMD Industries Limited v. Commissioner of Trade Tax (2023) 4 SCC 231 the Hon ble Apex Court has reiterated the settled position of law that in case of exemption notification / exemption provision, the same is required to be construed literally and the person claiming the exemption must satisfy all the conditions of exemption provision. Paragraphs-9 and 12 are as follows: 9. In the case of expansion or modernization , the exemption shall be available, if there is an additional production as a result of such modernisation or expansion. In the present case, we are concerned with the case of diversification . Therefore, the goods manufactured after diversification must be different goods from the goods manufactured before such diversification. As per the settled position of law, in case of an exemption notification/exemption provision, the same is required to be const ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e should be strictly construed and if the condition under which the exemption was granted stood changed on account of any subsequent event the exemption would not operate. 24. In our view, an exception or an exempting provision in a taxing statute should be construed strictly and it is not open to the court to ignore the conditions prescribed in the industrial policy and the exemption notifications. 25. In our view, the failure to comply with the requirements renders the writ petition filed by the respondent liable to be dismissed. While mandatory rule must be strictly observed, substantial compliance might suffice in the case of a directory rule. 26. Whenever the statute prescribes that a particular Act is to be done in a particular manner and also lays down that failure to comply with the said requirement leads to severe consequences, such requirement would be mandatory. It is the cardinal rule of interpretation that where a statute provides that a particular thing should be done, it should be done in the manner prescribed and not in any other way. It is also settled rule of interpretation that where a statute is penal in character, it must be strictly construed and followed. Sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns in the statute so as to supply any deficiency; (ii) Before taxing any person, it must be shown that he falls within the ambit of the charging section by clear words used in the section; and (iii) If the words are ambiguous and open to two interpretations, the benefit of interpretation is given to the subject and there is nothing unjust in a taxpayer escaping if the letter of the law fails to catch him on account of the legislature's failure to express itself clearly. 56. The notification in clear words grants exemption on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays which are manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units. So the exemption is on the sale if the commodity is manufactured by Small-Scale industrial units. From the plain language of the notification it does not follow that the sale should also be by the Small-Scale industrial units alone, which has manufactured it. The expression by refers to manufactured and not the sale . So, where the Pulp Moulded Egg Trays are manufactured by Small-Scale industrial units, their sale, may be by the same Small-Scale industrial units which has manufactured, or may be by some other Small-Scale Industrial Units dealer/assessee which may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the sale or purchase of such goods inside the appropriate State; and (b) in the case of goods other than declared goods, shall be calculated at the rate of ten per cent or at the rate applicable to the sale or purchase of such goods inside the appropriate State whichever is higher; and for the purpose of making any such calculation any such dealer shall be deemed to be a dealer liable to pay tax under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, notwithstanding that he, in fact, may not be so liable under that law. (2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1A) of section 6 or sub-section (1) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of this section, the tax payable under this Act by a dealer on his turnover in so far as the turnover or any part thereof relates to the sale of any goods, the sale or, as the case may be, the purchase of which is, under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, exempt from tax generally or subject to tax generally at a rate which is lower than four percent (whether called a tax or fee or by any other name), shall be nil or, as the case may be, shall be calculated at the lower rate. Explanation - For the purposes of this sub-section a sale or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clarify the ambiguity or to widen the scope of the main section, to determine, there is no single yardstick to decide this question, and the Court should find out the true legislative intent and give effect thereto. It referred to Bihta Co-op. Development and Cane Marketing Union Ltd. v. Bank of Bihar AIR 1967 SC 389 in which the Hon ble Apex Court had observed that the Court should not go only by the label and the explanation must be read ordinarily to clear up any ambiguity in the main section and it cannot be construed to widen the ambit of the section. However, if on a true reading of an Explanation it appears to the Court in a given case that the effect of the Explanation is to widen the scope of the main section then effect must be given to the legislative intent. In all such cases, the Court has to find out the true intention of the legislature. 63. The Hon ble Apex Court also referred to Doypack Systems (P) Ltd. v. Union of India (1988) 2 SCC 299 in which it was observed inter alia that the deeming provision generally is intended to enlarge the meaning of the particular word or to include matters which otherwise may not fall within the main provision. In Corporation Bank ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reated must also be given its full effect. Paragraph-71 is as follows: 71. In Dipak Chandra Ruhidas v. Chandan Kumar Sarkar [(2003) 7 SCC 66] it was held that in a case where a legal fiction created in the Explanation was construed to be validly made as thereby the main provision was made absolutely clear and explicit, the legal fiction so created must also be given its full effect. 66. In the present case, Explanation to sub-section (2A) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act also contains a deeming provision. The deeming provision is inbuilt in such explanation and that the deeming provision is that a sale or purchase of any case shall not be deemed to be exempt from tax generally .. . Here the deeming provision is a negative unlike in the case of Corporation Bank (supra), where a deeming provision was shall be deemed to be . In the present case, the deeming provision in the explanation being in negative, applying the ratio as laid down in the case of Corporation Bank (supra), we hold that such deeming provision in the explanation , limits or restricts the general exemption. In other words, an exemption from tax which may be a general exemption for the purposes of the State Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... materials and finished products for a period of five years from the date the unit goes into production The aforesaid clause (2) was substituted by subsequent government order dated 25.08.1971 as under: 2. Grant of exemption from the sales tax both on raw materials and finished products. 69. The Hon ble Apex Court in Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) observed that for attracting the exemption provided by the government order, it had to be established that (i) the goods, the sale or purchase of which is claimed to be exempt from tax, are manufactured by a large or medium scale industry and (ii) that the said goods are manufactured and sold within five years from the date the said industrial unit has gone into production. The Hon ble Apex Court addressed the question as to whether an exemption of the nature granted under the Government Order No. 159 dated 26.03.1971 was an exemption available only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions within the meaning of the Explanation to Section 8 (2-A) or was it a case where the goods were exempt from the tax generally within the meaning of Section 8 (2-A). 70. The Hon ble Apex Court held that the idea behind sub-section (2-A) of Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rements of Section 8 (2-A) and consequently, the exemption from tax under the Central Act was not available. 71. In Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) the Hon ble Apex Court referred to its previous two pronouncements in Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. v. State of Haryana (1976) 4 SCC 27 and International Cotton Corpn. (P) Ltd. v. C.T.O. (1975) 3 SCC 585. Referring to the 1st case of Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. (supra), it observed that the question was whether the poles and cables sold to Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking were exempt from Central sales tax by virtue of the fact that Section 5 (2) (a) (iv) of the Punjab Sales Tax Act exempted sales to any undertaking supplying electrical energy to the public under a licence or sanction granted or deemed to have been granted under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 of goods for use by it in the generation or distribution of such energy from the State tax. Referring to the said judgment, the Hon ble Apex Court observed and emphasized that general exemption means that the goods should be totally exempt from tax before similar exemption from the levy of Central sales tax can become available. Where the exemption from taxation is conferred by cond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere, it could probably have been possible to argue that inasmuch as the goods sold by a particular manufacturer-dealer are exempt from the State tax in his hands, they must equally be exempt under the Central Act. But sub-section (2-A) requires specifically that such exemption must be a general exemption and not an exemption operative in specified circumstances or under specified conditions. Can it be said that the goods sold by the dealers in this case are exempt from tax generally under the State sales tax enactment? The answer can only be in the negative. Such goods are exempt from tax only when they are manufactured in a large or medium industrial unit within five years of its commencement of production and sold within the said period, i.e., in certain specified circumstances alone. The exemption is not a general one but a conditional one. The exemption under the Government Order No. 159 is not with reference to goods or a class or category of goods but with reference to the industrial unit producing them and their manufacture and sale within a particular period. For the purposes of the government order, the nature, class or category of goods is irrelevant; it may be any goods. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecified circumstance in that case was that the sale must be to an undertaking engaged in supplying electrical energy to the public under a licence and the specified condition was that the goods purchased by the undertaking must be used for generation or distribution of electrical energy. If any of these circumstances are not satisfied, it was pointed out, the sale of such goods was not exempt from tax. It was emphasised that (SCC p. 31, para 15): General exemption means that the goods should be totally exempt from tax before similar exemption from the levy of Central sales tax can become available. Where the exemption from taxation is conferred by conditions or in certain circumstances there is no exemption from tax generally . (emphasis added) In our respectful opinion, the ratio of this decision clearly concluded the question arising in Pine Chemicals [(1992) 2 SCC 683] against the assessees inasmuch as it was not a case where goods were totally exempt from tax . It was a case where the exemption operated or was attracted only if it was established that such goods were manufactured in a large or medium industrial unit within five years of its going into production and were sold w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2-A) is certainly the one pointed out by the learned counsel, it is not possible or permissible to ignore the clear and unambiguous language employed in Section 8(2-A). The sub-section does not say that wherever a particular sale or purchase of goods is exempt from tax under the State enactment, it would equally be exempt from tax under the Central enactment. It imposes a further and a very important requirement, viz., that the sale or purchase of goods, in respect of which exemption is claimed under the Central Act, should be exempt from tax generally under the State enactment. Not stopping with that, the sub-section proceeds to explain and define what do the words exempt from tax generally under the sales tax law of the appropriate State mean? In this view of the matter, acceptance of the contention urged by Shri Aggarwal would be a case of over-simplification and violative of the express language employed in the sub-section. 73. Applying the principle of law laid down in Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) we proceed to consider the G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 to find out if the said government order is granting general exemption within the meaning of Section 8 (2A) of the Cent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod of within five years of the commencement of the production and sole within the said period , were considered as the specified circumstances or under specified conditions in which or under which the exemption was available. It was held that it being so, the exemption granted by the government order under the State law was not a general exemption, but a conditional one and consequently, the exemption from tax under the State Act was not for Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Applying the same principle, we hold that the G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 does not grant exemption from tax, to the goods i.e., pulp moulded egg trays manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units, in general for the purposes of Section 8 (2A) of CST Act. In other words, the pulp moulded egg trays manufactured by all kinds of industries are not exempted. The exemption is only under the specified circumstances or under specified conditions on only those pulp moulded egg trays which are manufactured by Small-Scale industrial units. The exemption under Section 8 (2A) of the Central Act does not speak of an exemption for the dealer much less for the unit manufactured under Section 8 (2A) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 5-A(1)(vi) of the A.P.G.S.T Act 1957. (ii) The plain language of the G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 shows that the respondent/assessee/dealers are entitled for exemption from tax on the commodity in question. (iii) The G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 notification, cannot be construed as a notification granting exemption from tax generally under the Central Sales Tax Act, under Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act in view of its Explanation and the law as laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in Pine Chemicals Limited (supra). (iv) The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that the respondent-assessee is entitled for exemption from tax under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. (v) We however, clarify that based on the G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 the respondent/assessee would not be entitled to claim Exemption from Central Tax under Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. 77. The Questions of law A , B , C as framed in para-13 (supra) are answered as in para-76 (supra) Result: 78. In the result, all the Tax Revision Cases are dismissed with the aforesaid clarifications. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
