1. Dispute regarding turnover tax exemption for soyabean oil husk under a notification exempting husk of grains, cereals, pulses, and rice under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
1998 Supreme(SC) 1024
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N.Kirpal : G.T.Nanavati : S.P.Bharucha
State Of Karnataka
Versus
Bangalore Soft Drinks Private Limited
Case No. : 7499 of 1995
Date of Decision : 9/23/98
Important Points
If a fact-finding authority determines a crop is a pulse, its husk is exempt from tax under a notification exempting the husk of pulses, regardless of whether the crop itself is classified as an oilseed in the Act's schedule.
Subject
Tax Law - Sales Tax
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) General Sales Tax Act - Section 12 - Tax exemption notification - Husk of grains, cereals, pulses and rice - Whether husk of soyabean is exempt from turnover tax - If the final fact finding authority holds that soyabeans are pulses, the husk of soyabeans is the husk of pulses and the notification granting exemption to the husk of pulses squarely applies. (Para 6)
(B) Interpretation of Tax Entries - The classification of a product as an oilseed in the schedule to the Act does not prevent its husk from being covered by a notification exempting the husk of grains, cereals, or pulses, particularly when the husk is not specifically listed in the schedule and would otherwise be taxed under a residuary entry. (Para 6)
Facts of the case:
The assessees extract oil from soyabeans. The assessing authority held that the husk of soyabeans was not exempt from turnover tax under a notification that exempted the husk of all grains, cereals, pulses, and rice. The lower authorities and the High Court examined whether soyabeans, though listed as oilseeds in the Act's schedule, could be considered pulses or grains for the purpose of the exemption.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the relevant article for exemption is the husk. Since the final fact-finding authority had determined that soyabeans are pulses, the husk of soyabeans is the husk of pulses.
Issues: Whether the husk of soyabean oil was liable to be taxed or whether it was covered by the notification exempting the husk of all grains, cereals, pulses, and rice.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the classification of soyabeans as oilseeds in the schedule to the Act does not exclude the husk of soyabeans from the scope of a notification exempting the husk of pulses, as the husk is a distinct article from the seed.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
(B) Interpretation of Tax Entries - The classification of a product as an oilseed in the schedule to the Act does not prevent its husk from being covered by a notification exempting the husk of grains, cereals, or pulses, particularly when the husk is not specifically listed in the schedule and would otherwise be taxed under a residuary entry. (Para 6)
Facts of the case:
The assessees extract oil from soyabeans. The assessing authority held that the husk of soyabeans was not exempt from turnover tax under a notification that exempted the husk of all grains, cereals, pulses, and rice. The lower authorities and the High Court examined whether soyabeans, though listed as oilseeds in the Act's schedule, could be considered pulses or grains for the purpose of the exemption.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the relevant article for exemption is the husk. Since the final fact-finding authority had determined that soyabeans are pulses, the husk of soyabeans is the husk of pulses.
Issues: Whether the husk of soyabean oil was liable to be taxed or whether it was covered by the notification exempting the husk of all grains, cereals, pulses, and rice.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the classification of soyabeans as oilseeds in the schedule to the Act does not exclude the husk of soyabeans from the scope of a notification exempting the husk of pulses, as the husk is a distinct article from the seed.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. State argues soyabean husk is taxable because soyabeans are specifically listed as oilseeds in the Act's schedule, excluding them from the exemption for pulses. (Para 4 )
3. The court found the exemption applies to the husk; since soyabeans are pulses, their husk is exempt regardless of the plant's classification as an oilseed. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. If a plant is determined to be a pulse, its husk is exempt under a notification covering husk of pulses, notwithstanding the plant's classification as an oilseed. (Para 6 )
5. Appeals dismissed. (Para 8 )
6. Does the classification of a plant as an oilseed preclude its husk from being exempt as the husk of a pulse?
No. The court held that the relevant factor is whether the husk is that of a grain, cereal, or pulse. Classification of the plant as an oilseed does not exclude its husk from the exemption if the plant is also a pulse. (Para 6 )
7. How is the term cereals interpreted when not defined in the Act?
The court noted the view that cereals mean any grain used for food, and soyabeans, being used for food, can be categorized as such. (Para 5 )
8. What is the impact of a fact-finding authority's determination on tax exemption eligibility?
The court accepted the Board of Revenue's finding that soyabeans are pulses, which directly led to the conclusion that soyabean husk is the husk of pulses and thus exempt. (Para 6 )
(1) THE question that the High court of Madhya Pradesh was required to consider in these appeals reads thus :
"WHETHER, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that the husk of soyabean oil was liable to be taxed as the same was not covered by notification No. 1073-537-V ST dated 7-4-67 as extended from time to time and consequently it was not exempt from payment of turnover tax?"
(2) THE High court answered the question in the negative and in favour of the assessees. The State is in appeal by special leave.
(3) THE notification which we are required to consider was issued on 7/04/1987 in exercise of power conferred by Section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958. Thereby the State exempted from the payment of tax "husk of all grains, cereals, pulses and rice."
(4) THE assessees extract oil from soyabean. In their assessment the assessing authority held that the husk of soyabeans was not exempt from the payment of tax by reason of the said notification and assessed the assessees accordingly. The assessees first appeal to the Deputy Commissioner and second appeal to the Board of Revenue were dismissed. The Board of Revenue found that there was "no doubt that soyabean is a leguminous plant and it would have come under pulses, had it not been specifically included as an oilseed under the schedule appended to the Act itself................................item 7 of Part I of Schedule II includes Soyabean (Glycine seja) specifically. When soyabean has been treated as oilseed under the Act it cannot be considered as other than oilseed."
(5) IN answering the question the High court took the view that cereals, which were not defined in the act, meant any grain which was used for food. Soyabeans were used for food. No particular species of grain could be excluded from the category of grain merely because it was capable of being used as an oilseed as well.
(6) IT seems to us that what is relevant is thus what is the article which is exempted from tax by the said notification. The article is the husk, whether it be of grains or of cereals or of pulses. The husk of soyabeans could not have been taxed under the entry relating to soyabeans in the Schedule to the Act. There being no entry in the Schedule specifically relating to husk, it could, at best, have been taxed under a residuary entry. There is, in our view, no justification for the argument that the husk of soyabeans falls outside the scope of the said notification because soyabeans have been specifically listed in the Schedule to the Act under the category of oilseeds. What is relevant for our purposes is to see whether the husk of soyabeans is the husk of a grain or a cereal or a pulse. The final fact finding authority, the Board of Revenue, has held that soyabeans are pulses. The husk of soyabeans, therefore, is the husk of pulses and the notification squarely applies.
(7) IT is, in these circumstances, unnecessary to refer to the authorities cited by learned counsel for the State which would apply in relation to the soyabean and not to the husk.
(8) THE appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.
