2007(5) Supreme 807
Supreme Court of India
(From Allahabad High Court)
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & D.K. JAIN, JJ.
M/s Trutuf Safety Glass Industries — Petitioner
versus
Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. — Respondent
Appeal (civil) 3467 of 2007
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2674 of 2006)
Decided on : 06-08-2007
U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 – Section 4-B – The Entry contains an expansive description i.e. “glass” and “glasswares” in all forms” – There is no dispute that the articles manufactured by the assessee are articles made of glass – The word ‘form’ connotes a visible aspect such as shape or mode in which a thing exists or manifests itself, species, kind or variety – a (Paras 13)
Interpretation of statutes – Taxing statute – It is settled law that while interpreting the entry for the purpose of taxation recourse should not be made to the scientific meaning of the terms or expressions used but to their popular meaning, that is to say, the meaning attached to them by those dealing in them – This is what is known as “common parlance test” – The dictionary meaning of ‘glassware’ means an article made of glass – High Court erroneously held that the articles manufactured by the assessee cannot be described as glass or glass wares; view of High Court would have been correct had the expression “in all forms” not succeeded the expression “glass and glass wares”. (Para 14)
(1986)3 SCC 480 – Distinguished AIR 1998 SC 74; 1846 (6) Moore PC 1; JT 1998 (2) SC 253; 1978 1 All ER 948 (HL); (1910) AC 445 (HL); AIR 1962 SC 847 – Relied upon.
Interpretation of statutes – Statutes should be construed not as theorems of Euclid but words must be construed with some imagination of the purposes which lie behind them – The legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process – The grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is to be adhered to unless that would lead to some absurdity or some repugnance or inconsistency with the rest of the instrument – Therefore, High Court was not justified in interfering with the order of the Tribunal – Impugned order set aside. (Paras 18, 20, 23 and 24)
218 FR 547; AIR 1990 SC 981; (2000) 5 SCC 515; 1966 1 QB 878; 1966 AC 557; 11 Moore, P.C. 345; 1 T.R. 52; 6 H.L. Cas. 61; 11, C.B. 378 – Relied upon.
Facts of the case:
Appellant (the ‘assessee’) filed an application for grant of recognition certificate under Section 4-B of the Act in respect of notified goods mentioned in Annexure-III of the Notification No.7551 dated 31st December, 1976. By order dated 22.12.1987 the Assessing Authority granted recognition certificate in regard to “Automobile Safety Toughened Glass” whereby the assessee was authorized to purchase raw materials and packing materials at the concessional rate of tax. Being aggrieved by the denial of total exemption of sales tax on the purchase of raw materials and packing materials, an appeal under Section 9 of the Act was filed which was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) by order dated 11.1.1989. Consequentially, the recognition certificate was directed to be amended to the effect that the assessee would be entitled to purchase raw materials and packing materials without payment of any sales tax on such purchases. This order was confirmed in Second appeal by the Tribunal, as Revenue’s appeal before the Tribunal was dismissed. An application for revision was filed before the High Court which, by the impugned order, confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer.
Findings of the Court:
Articles manufactured by the appellant are covered by the expression “glass” and “glasswares” in all forms” and hence eligible for exemption.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.—
1.Leave granted.
2.Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court allowing the revision filed under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (in short the ‘Act’). It was held by the impugned order that the articles manufactured by the appellant i.e. toughened safety glass including wind screen, door screen, side screen and back screens were taxable as these articles did not constitute “glass” or “glassware” within the meaning of the Notification under Section 4-B of the Act. Accordingly, the order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad (in short the ‘Tribunal’) was set aside.
3.Background facts in a nutshell are as follows :
“Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘assessee’) filean application for grant of recognition certificate under Section 4-B of the Act in respect of notified goods mentioned in Annexure-III of the Notification No.7551 dated 31st December, 1976. By order dated 22.12.1987 the Assessing Authority granted recognition certificate in regard to “Automobile Safety Toughened Glass” whereby the assessee was authorized to purchase raw materials and packing materials at the concessional rate of tax. Being aggrieved by the denial of total exemption of sales tax on the purchase of raw materials and packing materials, an appeal under Section 9 of the Act was filed which was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) by order dated 11.1.1989. Consequentially, the recognition certificate was directed to be amended to the effect that the assessee would be entitled to purchase raw aterials and packing materials without payment of any sales tax on such purchases. This order was confirmed in Second appeal by the Tribunal, as Revenue’s appeal before the Tribunal was dismissed. An application for revision was filed before the High Court which, by the impugned order, confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer. It was held that the expression “glass” or “glass ware” does not include the articles manufactured by the assessee. While coming to this conclusion reliance was placed on a decision of this Court in Atul Glass Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise,1 (1986 (3) SCC 480).”
4.Revenue’s stand before the High Court was that the entry “glass and glass wares in all forms” cannot include the articles manufactured by the assessee. Reference was made to para 17 of the judgment in Atul Glass’s case (supra). The stand of the revenue was accepted as noted by the High Court.
5.In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the crucial expressions in the entry i.e. “in all forms” had not been considered by the High Court in proper perspective. When the meaning of the expression is clear, there was no need to find out any technical meaning.
6.At this juncture, the relevant entries in the various Notifications need to be noted.
7.Notification No.ST-II-7551/X-9(1)-76 dated 31.12.1976 issued under Section 4-B of the Act is of considerable significance. Clause 2 of the said Notification provides that no tax shall be payable on the sale to or, as the case may be, purchase by any units in respect of raw materials required by it for use in the manufacture of the goods mentioned in Annexure III or for the packing materials for the said goods manufactured by it. Entry 2 of Annexure III is the pivotal entry so far as the present dispute is concerned. Same reads as follows :
“2.Glass and glass wares including optical glass in all forms.”
(Underlined for Emphasis)
8.The crucial expression in the entry is “in all forms”. By subsequent Notification the State Government superseded all the previous notifications under Section 4-B of the Act. In Notification No. ST-II-4519/X-7(19)/87 dated 29.8.1987 Entry II of Annexure I to the said Notification reads as follows :
“2.Glass and glassware including optical glass in all its forms but excluding ornamented or cut glass bangles.”
(Underlined for Emphasis)
9.A comparison of the previous and s
Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. v. Popular Trading Company, Ujjain
Atul Glass Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. M/s Price Waterhouse
Jamma Masjid, Mercara v. Kodimaniandra Deviah
Union of India v. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama
Dr. R. Venkatchalam and Ors. etc. v. Dy. Transport Commissioner and Ors. etc.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.