Entry 44-A of the First Schedule of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, should be interpreted in light of the context and setting in which the words "foodstuff or product" are used, and that the words "all other" indicate that entry 44-A cannot be read in isolation but has to be read along with entry 44.

S. PARVATHA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS special appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated 31/10/1988, passed in exercise of his powers under sub-section (1) of section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 ("the Act", for short), holding that "honeyrex" should be treated as general goods taxable as such under the provisions of the Act and not as falling under entry 44-A of the First Schedule to the Act as held by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner in his order dated 25/11/1985, while allowing the appeal before him of the appellant herein and reversing the assessment order dated 9/07/1985, of the Commercial Tax Officer bringing to tax the turnover for the assessment year 1984-85 relating to the sales of "honeyrex" treating it as general goods. It is not in dispute that the sales of "honeyrex by the appellant herein during the assessment year 1984-85 were second sales and if "honeyrex" is to be treated as general goods, the turnover relating to the said sales would be attracted to tax. The said turnover will not be attracted to tax, if "honeyrex" falls under entry 44-A of the First Schedule to the Act because, then, only first sales of "honeyrex" in the State would be attracted to tax. The short but troublesome question in the present special appeal is whether "honeyrex" falls under entry 44-A of the First Schedule of the Act. It is not the contention of the appellant that it could fall under any other entry in the Schedules to the Act as in force at the relevant time.

( 2 ) THE present entries 44 and 44-A in the First Schedule were introduced by Act 49 of 1976 with effect from 1/09/1976, in the place of the earlier entry 44 which was as follows :"44. Milk foods and powder and baby milk food excluding fresh milk. "

( 3 ) IN view of this and in view of the working of entry 44-A, it is necessary to read the two entries, as they exist now, together. They are as follows :"44. Milk foods and powders such as Horlicks, Viva and the like condensed milk, baby milk and baby foods. 44-A. All other foodstuffs or products, whether used as such or after mixing them with any other foodstuff or beverage when sold in sealed or tinned containers such as Bournvita, Ovaltine, Ragimalt, Boost and the like. "

( 4 ) THE Appellate Deputy Commissioner held that "all other foodstuffs" mentioned in the entry means foodstuffs other than milk foods and powders such as Horlicks etc. , mentioned in entry 44 and that the examples "bournvita, Ovaltine, Ragimalt, Boost and the like" fitted in the description of foodstuffs or products used after mixing with other foodstuffs and that no example was given in entry 44-A for foodstuffs or products used as such. He observed that earlier in another appeal relating to another assessee, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner held that "honeyrex" was a food product falling under entry 44-A and that the Commercial Tax Officer being an inferior authority was bound to follow the said decision and in that view of the matter, allowed the appeal preferred by the appellant herein against the order of the Commercial Tax Officer dated 9/07/1985. Before the Commissioner, the appellant herein, in his reply to the show cause notice issued to him under section 20 of the Act, relied on the clarification dated 11/02/1982, issued by the Government of India to the manufacturers of "honeyrex", i. e. , M/s. Bell and Company, and on the decision of this Court dated 13/02/1976, in Criminal Appeal No. 663 of 1974 relating to the prosecution proceedings against a dealer of "honeyrex" for violating the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and on the decision of the Madras High Court dated 29/07/1978, in Criminal Appeal No. 848 of 1977 preferred by Bell and Company and on the decision of the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal", for short) dated 1/05/1986, in T. A. No. 546 of 1986 (1985 ? ). Government of India in its clarification issued to Bell and Company stat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document