SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Mad) 621

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATASWAMI
R. Shanmugam Pillai and Company - Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu - Respondents
T.C. Nos. 89 and 98 of 1980
Decided On : 19 December 1989

Appearing Advocates:C. Venkataraman, R. Karuppan, Advocates.

"Fried gram" falls within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.

Headnote:

SALES TAX - Fried gram - Whether falls under entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Held, yes.

Fact of the Case:

The issue before the court was whether "fried gram" falls within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (the Act).

Finding of the Court:

The court held that "fried gram" falls within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Act and is, therefore, not exigible to tax under entry 80(b) of the First Schedule to the Act.

Issues: Whether "fried gram" falls within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the object and intention of bringing pulses and grams under section 14(vi-a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as explained by the learned single Judge in 1982 (51) STC 55 (Mad.) (S. K. Nataraja Mudaliar and Co. v. State of Tamil Nadu).

Final Decision: The court allowed the tax cases and set aside the orders of the Tribunal, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and assessing officer.

Judgment :-

VENKATASWAMI, J.

The common question that arises for consideration in both these tax cases is, whether "fried gram" will fall within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter called "the Act"). The Assessing Officer, Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench) have concurrently taken the view that "fried gram" will not fall under entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Act and, therefore, exigible to tax under entry 80(b) of the First Schedule to the Act. At once, we can state that the Tribunal, while coming to the conclusion that "fried gram" is exigible to tax under entry 80(b) of the First Schedule to the Act, expressly dissented from a contrary view taken by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore, in C.T.A. Nos. 459 and 460 of 1970. The view taken by the Additional Bench was to the effect that "fried gram" will fall within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Act. It has been brought to our notice that the view taken by the Additional Bench, Coimbatore, in C.T.A. No. 459 of 1970, has been approved by a Division Bench of this Court in Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Coimbatore v. Meenambika Trading Co. (T.C. No. 609 of 1980 dated 9th August, 1980). Ismail, C.J., speaking for the Bench, has held as follows :

"The only question that the Tribunal had to consider in the present case was, whether the fried and parched gram will fall within entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The entry itself uses the expression 'pulses, that is to say, gram or gulab gram, etc.'. It does not say whether parched or fried or not. Consequently the Tribunal had to consider what exactly the change that is brought about on a gram being parched or fried. The Tribunal referred to the meaning given for the word 'parch' in the Chamber's 20th Century Dictionary as 'to make hot and dry, to roast slightly'. If that is the correct meaning of the word 'parch', certainly by being parched, gram did not undergo such a change as to make it commercially a different commodity. If so, entry 6-A was rightly held applicable and consequently, the order of the Tribunal does not call for interference. The tax revision case is therefore dismissed." *

2. It has also been brought to our notice that the same view was taken by a learned single Judge of this Court in S. K. Nataraja Mudaliar and Co. v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 1982 (51) STC 55. Padmanabhan, J., after referring to the scope of sections 14 and 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the effect of the same in appreciating entry 6-A of the Second Schedule to the Act, has held as follows :

"The point in controversy between the assessee and the department is whether fried gram comes within the meaning of pulses or grams in item (vi-a) of section 14 of the Central Act and item 6-A of the Second Schedule to the State Act. If fried or parched grams fall within item (vi-a) of section 14 of the Central Act and item 6-A of the Second Schedule to the State Act, then they will stand excluded from entry 80(a) of the First Schedule to the State Act. Further, in respect of the said gram the State Government will be entitled to levy sales tax only at 4 per cent. On the other hand, if the fried grams or pulses do not fall under item (vi-a) of section 14 of the Central Act and item 6-A of the Second Schedule to the State Act, the State Government will be entitled to levy sales tax 4.7 per cent as has been done.

I therefore hold that pulses and grams included in item (vi-a) of section 14 of the Central Act and item 6-A of the Second Schedule to the State Act will take in pulses or grams whether parched or fried. Entry 80(a) and (b) of the First Schedule to the State Act included the items which have been declared as declared goods under item (vi-a) of section 14 of the Central Act and item 6-A of the Second Schedule to the State Act which the State Government ha





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top