1966 Supreme(All) 154
Allahbad High Court
S.C.MANCHANDA,M.H.BEG
Plastic Products Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, Sales Tax U.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 09/21/1966
C.S.P Singh, for Appellant; Standing Counsel, for Opposite Parties.
Headnote:
TAXATION - U.P. SALES TAX ACT - NOTIFICATION NO. 905/X - ITEM NO. 6 - SAFETY RAZOR - WHETHER A COSMETIC OR TOILET REQUISITE - INTERPRETATION OF WORDS - RULE OF EJUSDEM GENERIS - APPLICATION.
Fact of the Case:
The assessee, a manufacturer of safety razors made out of plastic material, was assessed to sales tax under Notification No. 905/X issued under S. 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, which levied a higher rate of tax on cosmetics and toilet requisites. The assessee contended that a safety razor was not a cosmetic or a toilet requisite and, therefore, should be assessed at the lower rate under S. 3 of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that a safety razor was not a cosmetic or a toilet requisite within the meaning of Item No. 6 of the Notification. The court applied the rule of ejusdem generis to interpret the words "toilet requisites" and held that they must be confined to those articles which are of the same genus as "cosmetics". The court also held that the Notification was vague and ambiguous and that the ambiguity had to be resolved in favor of the assessee.
Issues: Whether a safety razor is a cosmetic or a toilet requisite within the meaning of Item No. 6 of Notification No. 905/X issued under S. 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the rule of ejusdem generis to interpret the words "toilet requisites" and held that they must be confined to those articles which are of the same genus as "cosmetics". The court also held that the Notification was vague and ambiguous and that the ambiguity had to be resolved in favor of the assessee.
Final Decision: The court answered the question in favor of the assessee and held that the safety razor was taxable under S. 3 of the Act and not at one anna per rupee under S. 3A of the Act.
MANCHANDA, J. :-These are cases stated under S. 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (hereafter referred to as the Act) The question referred is :
"Whether safety razor as manufactured by the applicant dealer can be classified as cosmetic and toilet within the purview of Notification No. 905/X referred to above ?"
2. The facts lie within a narrow compass. The assessee is a manufacturer of safety razors made out of plastic material. The relevant year of assessment is 1957-68. The Assessing Officer claimed that such a safety razor fell within the mischief of item No. 6 cosmetics and toilet requisites and was, therefore, assessable at a higher rate under the said notification issued under S. 3A of the Act. The assessee's contention on the other hand was that a safety razor was not a "cosmetic" nor was it a "toilet requisite" and, therefore, it fell to be assessed at the lower rate, under the general charging S. 3 of the Act. The Sale Tax Officer, however, held safety razors to fall within item No. 6 of the aforesaid notification and assessed it at single point accordingly. The assessment was confirmed by the Judge (Appeals) and the Judge (Revisions). Hence this reference at the instance of the assessee.
3. The relevant notification was issued under the powers conferred by S. 3A of the Act and it was declared :
"That the turnover in respect of the goods specified in the list below shall not with effect from April 1, 1956, be liable to tax except -
(a) in case of floods imported from out-side Uttar Pradesh, at the point of sale by manufacturer :
(b) in the case of goods manufactured in Uttar Pradesh, at the point of sale by the manufacturer;
and the Governor is further pleased to declare that such turnover shall with effect from the said date be taxed at the rate of one anna per rupee. ...Item 6,
"Cosmetics and toilet requisites".
The Hindi version of Item 6 of the Notification is (sic)
4. The list given in this Notification is a very elaborate one and has as many as 47 items ranging from "agricultural implements" to X-ray machines" Item No. 6 is cosmetics and toilet requisites". Item No. 35 is "sandal-wood oil" but this was deleted by a notification in 1956 Item 37 is "scents and perfumes" Item 38, "soap other than washing soap" Items Nos. 35, 37 and 38 have been specifically mentioned notwithstanding that they are included in the dictionary meaning of the words "cosmetics and toilet requisites". This shows how meticulous and careful the notification was to specify, even at the cost of repetition, where there was the slightest possibility of such article escaping from the clutches of the notification.
5. There is admittedly no item of "razor" or 'safety razor' and that is why the department has been pushed into bringing it within Item No. 6. The question that falls to be considered is whether the article "safety razor" fairly and squarely falls within the item "cosmetics or toilet requisites" ? "Cosmetics" is the special word used in item 6 which is followed by the general words "toilet requisites" What do these words mean ? In Webster's Third New International Dictionary the meaning given of "cosmetic" is "the art of beautifying the body, a preparation (Except soap) to be applied to the human body for beautifying preserving or altering the appearance of a person or for cleansing colouring conditioning or protecting the skin, hair nails, lips, eves or teeth". This word in Corpus Juris Secundum Vol. 20, is given the meaning, "a general term construed as having reference to hair preparations as well as to skin lotions, as including hair oils, eyes and dressings, tooth pastes, washes and dentifrices and toilet soaps; defined as meaning any external application intended to beautify or improve the complexion, skin or hair".
6. "Toilet" in Webster's Third New International Dictionary means "to make one's toilet; dress-groom the process of washing, grooming and arranging one-self for the days activities or for a special occasion". The examples o