Municipal Commissioner, Thane & Anr Vs. H & R Johnson (India) Ltd. & Anr  INSC 899 (6 August 1996)
K.T. (J) Thomas K.T. (J) Bharucha S.P. (J) Thomas. J.
JT 1996 (7) 473 1996 SCALE (5)590
question to be determined in this appeal has boiled down to a very narrow
compass-whether the "clay" imported by the respondents for
manufacturing ceramic tiles can be brought within the ambit of the item
described as "earth of any other kind ", in Entry No.47 of class IV
of Schedule I of the Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules,1968. (for short
the Rules. Respondents contended that the clay imported by them within the said
category which contention was found favour with the high Court of Bombay in the writ petition filed by the respondent.The
said decision is now being challenged in this appeal.
question came up through the facts of this case which are summarized as
are manufacturing ceramist tiles in their factory situated within the limits of
Thane Municipal Corporation (Maharashtra State) . The main ingredient used for the
said product is clay which respondent used get down from Rajasthan and Andhra
Pradesh. Under Section 105 of the Maharashtra Municipalties Act, 1965, the
municipal corporation is empowered to levy octroi duty on the goods brought
into the territorial limits of the municipal corporation at a rate not
exceeding the maximum limit prescribed by the Rules.Goods are classified in
Schedule I of the Rules for fixing different rates of octroi duty. In this
case, we are only concerned with the classified in Entries 45 and 47 of the
No.45 thereof consists of coal tar,asphait, bitumen, flooring stone, mangenese,
emery stone or powder, chalk powder, stone chips, stone powder, Agra stone, stone for building clinker and coal ash. In
respect of those goods Thane Municipal Corpration decided to levy the maxmium octroi
duty of 4% on the value prescribed by the Rules.
47 consists of yellow earth and earth of any other kind, sand, metal, rubble, murum
and gravel, for which the Corporation is empowered to levy a maximum of Rs. 2/-
per metric tonne. However, as for those goods. Thane Municipal Corporatiopn has
resolved to levy octroi duty only at the rate of Re.1/- per metric tonne.
pleaded that the clay imported by them shall be counted as "earth of any
other kind". But the Municipal Corporation insisted that the respondents
should pay higher octroi duty as the clay is "stone power" mentioned
in Entry No.45.
filed the writ petition in the High Court contending that the sand of municipal
corporation is erroneous and hence they may be inhibited from collecting octroi
duty at the higher rats. The High Court found in the impugned judgment that
this clay would fall within Entry No.47 and as such respondents are liable to
pay octroi duty only at the lesser rate of Re.1/- per metric tonne. On the
strength of the said finding the High Court directed the Corporation to refund
the excess amount collected from the respondents on and after the date of writ
counsel for the appellant Corporation assailed the conclusion of the High Court
contending that the expression "clay" as understood in common
parlance is contradistinct the meaning attached to the word "earth".
also contended that the raw material used by the respondents being a special
guilty of chins clay, the same could only have been classified as "stone
power" mentioned in entry 45 of the Schedule. Alternatively, it was
contended that High Court should not have ordered refund if the amount already
support of the first contention a reference was made to the observation
contained in the decision of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in
state and ors. (AIR 1969 Calcutta High Court in state of west Bengal & ors.vs. Jagdamba Prasad Singh
and ors. (AIR 1*969 Calcutta 281) that "ordinary earth is
not ordinary clay and cannot be called a minor mineral and the word clay is not
identical with "earth". Counsel brought to our notice that the
aforesaid observation was approved by the full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in M/s. Amar
Singh Modi Lal vs. State of Haryana and
ors. (AIR 1972 Punjab & Haryana 356.) After going through the relevant
passage in the decisions cited before us, we do not think that any such passing
observation would be of help to decides this dispute. That apart, the Calcutta
High Court was not inclined to extricate clay from earth for all purposes by
pointing out in the decision that there are some kind of earth which may be
clay. The full in Amar Singhs case (supra) has in fact skipped that issue by
observing that the said aspect does not have even a remote connection with the
question involved in the case before them.
the goods catalogued in Entry No.45 of the Schedule only one item need be
considered in this context and that is "stone power" because no other
item mentioned in the said entry in the said entry has even a semblance with
the clay involved in this case. Nor did the appellant make any attempt to; show
that is clay anything other than power.
must point out in this context that the burden is on appellant to show that
clay imported by the respondents is stone power when they entry . But no
material, whatsoever, has been produced in proof of their stand.
meaning or definition provided in standard dictionaries to word "clay"
would not help the appellant who made an endeavor to trace out some support
from such lexicons. In the websters Dictionary "clay" is shown
"a" natural earthy material ...used chiefly for making bricks:
in earth or mud". In the Concise Oxford Dictionary "clay" is
given the meaning as "stiff tenacious earth." In Chambers (Twentieth Century
)Dictionary it is defined as "earth in fine particles." Therefore, we
find no merit in the contention of the appellant Corporation that the clay
imported by the respondents must be kept outside the amount of Entry 47 of
Schedule I of the Rules.
alternative contention regarding refund of the amount (as ordered by High Court
) was advanced before us on the premiss that it would badly erode the financial
position of the Corporation-at any rate, the appellant may be denied of the
higher duty only from the date when the controversy is set at rest. and all
that is done or collection till then need not be reimbursed.
point out that when respondents maved for an interim order before the High
Court of Bombay for stay of collection of octroi duty at the higher rate the
following order was passed on the application on 13th March 1992.
counsel. Interim relief refused. The payment of Octroi duty be stayed. In case
petitioner succeeds the respondents will refund the excess duty." Parties
are bound by the said order it is too late in the day for the appellant to make
a plea on the strength of financial burden etc. Refund has rightly been ordered
by the High Court and it calls for no intervention by us.
this appeal without any order as to costs.