SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, DIPANKAR DATTA, JJ.
M/s Trimurthi Fragrances (P) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 8485, 8486, 8487, 8488, 8491-8494, 8495, 8496-8501, 8502 of 2011, Civil Appeal Nos. 8617, 10374-10379 of 2014, Civil Appeal No. 289 of 2023
Decided On : 04-05-2023
TAXATION - SALES TAX - PAN MASALA - WHETHER PAN MASALA IS TOBACCO - WHETHER PAN MASALA IS EXEMPTED FROM TAXATION - WHETHER STATE LEGISLATURES ARE EMPOWERED TO LEVY SALES TAX ON PAN MASALA - WHETHER THE RATE OF STATE TAX CANNOT EXCEED THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE CENTRAL SALES TAX ACT, 1956.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants unsuccessfully argued that state legislatures were not empowered to levy sales tax on those articles, in view of the provision in the Constitution enabling the Union to levy additional duties of excise, and further that in any case, the rate of state tax cannot exceed the limit prescribed by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that state legislatures were competent to levy taxes on the sale or purchase of the commodities subjected to additional excise duty. The levy of any sales taxes only meant that additional excise duty levied on such commodities by the Central Government would not be distributed among the states which had chosen to levy a tax on the sale of such article.
Issues: 1. Whether state legislatures are empowered to levy sales tax on pan masala? 2. Whether the rate of state tax cannot exceed the limit prescribed by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the definition of 'tobacco' in the Central Excise Act, 1944 (CEA) does not include pan masala. Pan masala is a distinct product from tobacco and is not covered by the definition of 'tobacco' under the CEA. 2. The court held that the state legislatures are competent to levy taxes on the sale or purchase of the commodities subjected to additional excise duty. The levy of any sales taxes only meant that additional excise duty levied on such commodities by the Central Government would not be distributed among the states which had chosen to levy a tax on the sale of such article.
Final Decision: The appeals by the assessees have to fail. The revenue’s appeals are consequently allowed. There shall be no order on costs.
JUDGMENT :
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.
1. This judgment will dispose of appeals arising from judgments of three High Courts, on the question of taxability of pan masala or gutka/gutkha1 [Which is spelt differently in regional contexts as ‘gutka’ or ‘gutkha’ or ‘guhtka’ for convenience, this is hereafter referred to uniformly as ‘gutkha’] under state enactments. The appellants unsuccessfully argued that state legislatures were not empowered to levy sales tax on those articles, in view of the provision in the Constitution enabling the Union to levy additional duties of excise, and further that in any case, the rate of state tax cannot exceed the limit prescribed by the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
Brief Facts
2. The relevant central enactments are the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereafter “CST Act”) the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereafter “CET Act”) and the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (hereafter “ADE Act”). The state enactments in question are the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (hereafter “DST Act”) Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereafter “TNGST Act”) and the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereafter “UPTT Act”).
3. Section 14 of the CST Act declares certain goods to be of special importance and Section 15 restricts the power of taxation on the said goods. Originally Section 14(ix) of the CST Act read as follows:
“(ix) tobacco, as defined in Item No. 4 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Sale Act, 1944 (1 of 1944).”
Entry 4 of the CET Act, which defines ‘tobacco’ reads as follows:
“4. Tobacco
“Tobacco” means any form of Tobacco, whether cured or uncured and whether manufactured or not and includes the leaf, stalks and stems of the tobacco plant, but does not include any part of a tobacco plant while still attached to the earth......
(II) Manufactured Tobacco.
...........
(5) Chewing tobacco, including preparations commonly known as “Khara Masala, Kimam, Dokta, Zarda, Sukha and Surti.”
4. The Finance Act, 1988 (Central Act No. 26/1988) substituted the expressions in Section 14(ix) of the CST Act, with the following words, w.e.f. 13.05.1988:
“14(ix). Unmanufactured tobacco and tobacco refuse covered under sub-heading No. 2401.00, cigars and cheroots of tobacco covered under Heading No. 24.02, cigarettes and cigarillos of tobacco covered under the sub-Heading Nos. 2403.11 and 2403.21, and other manufactured tobacco covered under sub-heading Nos. 2404.41, 2404.50 and 2404.60 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986).”
5. The 1988 amendment to Section 14 of the CST Act was with a view to align the description of goods in that law, with the description in the CET Act, as is clear from the Finance Bill, 1988. Heading 24.04 of the CET Act originally read to include “Gudaku with brand name and without brand name” (Entries 2404.11 and 2404.12); cut tobacco (Entry 2404.13); hookah tobacco, chewing tobacco (including preparations known as khara masala, khiman, dokta, zarda and surti (Entry 2404.39); snuff (Entry 2404.49) and snuff of tobacco (Entry 2404.50). The entry in relation to chewing tobacco was amended w.e.f. 1993-94.
6. By Finance Act, 1995 ‘Pan Masala’ was brought under the Heading 21.06. In the year 1995, the Fourth Schedule was amended, and the relevant Clause (8) in Chapter 21 read as follows:
“(8) in Chapter 21:
(i) for NOTE 3, the following NOTE shall be substituted, namely:
“3. In this Chapter ‘Pan Masala’ means any preparation containing betel nuts and any one or more of the following ingredients, namely lime, katha (catechu) and tobacco, whether or not containing any other ingredients, such as cardamom, copra and menthol.”
Clause (10) in Chapter XXIV reads as follows:
(i) for NOTE 2, for the figures and word ‘24.02, 24.03 and 24.04’ the figures and word ‘24.01, 24.02, 24.03 and 24.04’ shall be substituted.”
Clause (9) in Chapter XXI reads as follows:
“(i) for Heading Nos. 21.06 and 21.07 and the entries relating thereto, the following shall be inserted, n
The Commissioner of Food Safety, Andhra Pradesh, has no authority or jurisdiction to issue notifications prohibiting the sale of Tobacco products within the meaning of Sections 3(m) and 3(p) of the C....
Restriction imposed trade and business in chewing/chewable tobacco products is in larger public interest and is a reasonable restriction and in no way offends right to carry on trade guaranteed under....
Point of law: Section 89 of the FSSA, gives the provisions of the FSSA, an overriding effect on all other food related laws. Once it is held that tobacco and other products, fall within the definitio....
The court established that the classification of tobacco products relies on the presence of manufacturing activity; absence of such activity necessitates classification as unmanufactured tobacco unde....
Tax exemption for HDPE woven fabrics requires actual levy of additional duty; nil rate does not equate to exemption under sales tax law.
Where a statute contains both a general provision as well as a specific provision, latter must prevail.
Tobacco is classified as 'food' under the Food Safety and Standards Act, allowing for regulation despite claims of it being inherently harmful.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the 'common parlance test' and the commercial understanding of terms in tax provisions to determine the classification of goods ....
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.