Interpretation of statutory provisions based on the context, collection, and object of the words, and application of the principle of ejusdem generis.

The Revenue is the revision petitioner herein. The sole question that arises for consideration is whether agarbathi will come within entry 80 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Tax Act. Entry 80 of the First Schedule to the Act is as follows :

"80. Talcum powder, other At the point of first sale 10 per perfumeries and cosmetics, in the State by a dealer cent." not falling under any who is liable to tax under other item in this section 5. Schedule.

The Appellate Tribunal answered the question in the negative. The Revenue has come up in revision.

2. Mr. Karunakaran Nambiar, Senior Government Pleader, argued that "agarbathi" will come within the words "other perfumeries and cosmetics". We are unable to accept this argument. It is true that agarbathi will be a "perfumery" in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Indian Herbs Research and Supply Company [1970] 25 STC 151 and also the decision of the Orissa High Court in Kamaru Zuman Khan v. State of Orissa [1981] 47 STC 22. The language of the relevant entries considered in the said decisions are far different and even if "agarbathi" is a perfumery, will it be taken in by the language of entry 80 of the First Schedule ? The crucial question herein is, what is the meaning of the relevant words "perfumeries and cosmetics" occurring in entry 80 of the First Schedule ? It is settled law that you should not only look at the words, but should also look at the context, the collection and the object of such words, relating to such a matter and interpret the meaning, according to what would appear to be the meaning intended to be conveyed by the use of the words under such circumstances. A word is known by the company it keeps. The principle of ejusdem generis should be borne in mind (noscitur a sociis) (see Rein v. Lane 36 LJQB 81, quoted in Varkey v. Agricultural Income-tax and Rural Sales Tax Officer [1954] 5 STC 348 (T-C), Ranganathan v. Government of Madras AIR 1955 SC 604, etc.). It is by bearing in mind the above principles of law, the crucial words, "other perfumeries and cosmetics" occurring in entry 80 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, should be understood. The preceding words "talcum powder" are significant. So viewed, we have no doubt in our mind that agarbathi cannot be considered to be a "perfumery", akin to "talcum powder", (the preceding words) occurring in entry 80 of the First Schedule. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the turnover of agarbathis can be assessed only at the general rate and not at 10 per cent under entry 80 of the First Schedule.

3. There is no merit in the tax revision case. It is dismissed.

Petition dismissed.