The word cloth used in the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 and the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950 includes sarees and dhoties.

CHANDRA REDDY, CJ.

( 1 ) THESE three revision petitions raise a common question as to the meaning of the word cloth used in the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 and the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950. T. R. C. No. 20 of 1959 deals with the tormer Act while the other two revisions deal with the latter Act.

( 2 ) T. R. C. No. 20 of 1959.-The respondents, a firm of merchants, are dealers in cloth. They sold fine and superfine printed sarees during the year 1956-57, and the turnover amounted to Rs. 25,949-11-0 in this behalf. The Deputy Commercial Tax officer, Vijayawada, treating the sales as falling under item i of sub-sction 2-A of section 3 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act imposed sales tax at the rate of one anna six pies for every rupee of the turnover. The appeal of the assessee to the deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes proved unsuccessful. The assesse went in further appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal accepted the contention of the assessee that sarees and dhoties would not embrace the definition contained in item 1 of section 3 (2-A) of the Madras General Tax Act and allowed the appeal: the Department seeks to revise this order under section 22 (1) of the Act and rule 40 of the Rules. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the distinction made by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal between cloth and articles of clothing covering sarees and dhoties is not borne out by the language of item 1 and that the word cotton-cloth is a generic term comprehending dhoties, sarees and other varieties of cloth. On the other hand, the stand taken by the assessee is that the expression cloth is confined to fabric that is sold by yard and cannot extend to the fabric that is sold as a unit and that any material that is used for a specific purpose cannot be described as cloth.

( 3 ) SUPPORT is sought for this proposition in Firm Jaswant rai Jai Narain v. Sales Tax Officer, (1955) 6 S. T. C. 386. The question there was whether a dealer in printed cloth, both handloom and mill-made, was entitled to the benefit of a notification which exempted the sale of cloth manufactured on handlooms with artificial silk, linen, flax and cotton or wool from sales-tax. The dealer took handloom and mill-made cloth and then printed it and sold it as sarees, lihafs, fards, bed-covers, etc. A Bench of the Allahabad High court ruled that the word cloth was to be distinguished from clothes or garments and that what was exempted under the notification was cloth and not clothes. The learned judges added that what the applicant did was to take handloom cloth and either cut it into specific sizes or to have them manufactured into specific sizes, so that the pieces could be used as sarees, bed covers, lihafs, etc. , and then to print them so that they could be readily used for the purpose for which they were meant and that the articles in which the applicant dealt were clothes or garments and not cloth . The principle laid down by the learned Judges lends some support to the theory propounded by the learned counsel for the assessee. With great respct to the learned Judges, we are unable to subscribe to the proposition so broadly stated. In our opinion, cotton cloth is comprehensive enough to take in sarees or dhoties. We feel that the legislature has used it in a general sense. In. common parlance, the word cloth is used to denote every fabric used for any purpose including the use as a wearing apparel. The words ought to be understood in the widest sense and not in a narrow sense. Courts should adopt the meaning of a word which harmonises with the context and advances the policy of the Act. There is no obstacle here in giving the fullest meaning, especially when it carries out the object of the Act. If we interpret the word in a narow and restricted sense as invited by the learned counsel for the respondents, it would be practically rendering item i otiose. It would exclude from its purview, if this test is a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document