1. In these Writ Petitions, the validity of the Gift - Tax Act (Central Act No.18 of 1958) to be referred to as the "Act" hereinafter, in so far as it purports to reach gifts of "lands and buildings" is challenged. The gifts with which we are concerned in these petitions are gifts of agricultural lands.

2. In Writ Petition No.1077/59, though the gift deed in question (dated 21/01/1958) includes properties other than agricultural lands, the tax levied in respect of non - agricultural lands is not challenged. The total tax levied on the petitioner by the Second Gift - Tax Officer, Mangalore, as per his proceedings No.83 - / 58-59 dated 25/11/1959 is Rs.35,612/- Out of this sum a sum of Rs.34,036/18 was levied as gift - tax in respect of a gift of a coffee plantation. It is this levy which is the subject - matter of challenge in that petition.

3. In Writ Petition No.19/1960, the settlement deed dated 14/05/1957 the one with which we are concerned, includes only agricultural lands: partly paddy fields and partly areca gardens. A tax of Rs.880/- was levied on the petitioner therein by the Gift - Tax Officer, Udipi, South Kanara as per Assessment Proceedings No. G.T.21/58-59 on his file.

4. There is no dispute that the "Act" purports to bring within its reach gifts of all properties moveable as well as immoveables; agricultural as well as non - agricultural properties. S.2(xii) of the "Act" says:
" 'Gift' means the transfer by one to another of any existing moveable or immovable property made voluntarily and without consideration in money or money's worth, and includes the transfer of any property deemed to be a gift under S.4"
"Property" is defined in S.2 (xxii) as that including any interest in property, movable or immovable. S.3 is the charging section and that says:
"Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, there shall be charged for every financial year commencing on and from the 1st day of April, 1958, a tax (hereinafter referred to as gift - tax) in respect of the gifts, if any, made by a person during the previous year (other than gifts made before the 1st April, 1957) at the rate or rates specified in the Schedule".
S.5 provides for certain exemptions. We are not concerned with those exemptions. It is conceded on behalf of the petitioners that if the provisions of the "Act" are valid, then the disputed transactions are within the mischief of the "Act".

5. It is urged on behalf of the petitioners that the "Act" in so far as it purports to affect gifts of "lands and buildings" is ultra vires of the powers of the Parliament. Admittedly, there are no specific entries in any of the Lists in Schedule VII of the Constitution conferring powers either on the Parliament or on the State Legislature to tax "gifts". According to the petitioners, that power is conferred on the State Legislatures as per Entry 18 read with Entry 49 of List II. But, according to the Revenue, it is an unallocated field and therefore, it comes within Entry 97 of List I we have to judge between these rival contentions. Before doing so, it is desirable to recapitulate certain well accepted canons of constructions in the matter of interpreting the scope of an Entry in any of the Lists.

6. An Entry in the Lists has to be read not in a narrow or restricted sense. Each general word should be held to extend to all ancillary or subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be comprehended in it. (United Provinces v. Mt. Atiqa Begum, AIR 1941 FC 16). In determining whether a particular legislation is with respect of matters included in any of the Lists, one has to ascertain the pith and substance or true nature and character of the impugned statute Subrahmanyan v. Muttuswami, AIR 1941 FC 47.
The rules which apply to the interpretation of other statutes apply equally to the interpretation of a constitutional enactment subject to this reservation that their application is of necessity conditioned by the subject - matter of the enactment itself.