State of Orissa Vs. M/S. Dinabandhu
Sahu & Sons [1976] INSC 88 (30 March 1976)
GOSWAMI, P.K.
GOSWAMI, P.K.
KHANNA, HANS RAJ
CITATION: 1976 AIR 1561 1976 SCR (3) 966 1976
SCC (4) 431
ACT:
Central Sales Tax Act (74 of 1956), s.
14(vi)- Notification by concerned department of Government of India including
some seeds in 'oil seeds'-How far relevant in determining category of seeds.
HEADNOTE:
Under s. 14(vi), Central Sales Tax Act, 1956,
among goods declared to be of special importance in inter-State trade and
commerce are mentioned oil seeds, that is to say, seeds yielding non-volatile
oils used for human consumption, or in industry, etc., or volatile oils used
chiefly in medicines etc. The Assistant Commissioner under the Orissa Sales Tax
Act, the Tribunal, and the High Court on reference, held that jeera dhania,
panmohuri, methi and postak are oil-seeds within the meaning of s. 14(vi) and
liable to a lesser rate of tax. The High Court relied on ordinary and technical
dictionaries and a notification of the Ministry of Finance, Department of
Economic Affairs, Government of India, dated January 3, 1959 for its
conclusion.
In appeal to this Court under Art. 136, it
was contended by the State, relying on State of Andhra Pradesh v. Kajjam
Ramchandraiah Gari Anantaiah (1961) 12 STC 795, that the Court should adopt the
meaning given to these articles in common parlance by people who use them, that
so understood they are spices and not oil-seeds, and that though they yield
non-volatile oil to a certain extent, there is no evidence that they fall
within the description in s. 14(vi).
Dismissing the appeal,
HELD: It cannot be said that the Tribunal was
not right, and so it is not a fit case for interference under Art. 136, when
the High Court held that the Tribunal was right. [970C-D, G] (a) Item 3,
Schedule IV, A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957, is identical with s. 14(vi) of
the Central Act. In Kajjam Ramachandriah's case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court
held that dhania did not come within the definition of oil- seeds relying on
some letters from (i) Director, National Chemical Laboratory, Poona, and (ii)
Central Food Technological Research Institute, Mysore. [968F] (b) The High
Court was right in the present case in holding that the notification of the
Government of India had no statutory force and was not binding on the Sales Tax
Officer, but it cannot be said that the High Court and Tribunal were not right
in preferring the opinion therein as good evidence for their conclusion to the
opinions in the letters relied upon by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The
Ministry of Finance, which issued the notification, is intimately conversant
not only with the policy of legislation for the purpose of implementation of
the provisions of the Central Act, but is also familiar with the nature and
quality of the commodities and also their use from time to time. [970D-F] (c)
Further, the letters of the Director, National Chemical Laboratory and the
Central Food Technological Research Institute, do not indicate that the
opinions expressed therein were firm or even final or whether all the uses
mentioned in the definition of oil-seeds were brought to their notice. [970F]
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, Indore v. Bakhat Rai and Co. (1966)
18 Sales Tax Cases 285 and The Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax
and Sales Tax, Kozhikode v. Sreedhara Shenoy (1973) 32 Sales Tax Cases 181,
referred to.
967
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal
Nos. 912 to 916 of 1971.
Appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment
and Order dated the 2nd July 1969 of the Orissa High Court in Special
Jurisdiction Cases Nos. 73, 74, 75 and 76 of 1964.
V. C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey: for
Appellants (In CAs. 912-13/71) R. N. Sachthey; for Appellant in CAs. 914-16/71.
Gobind Das, amicus curiae for Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
GOSWAMI, J.-Five quarters of assessment of sales tax are involved in these five
appeals, by special leave, the period commencing from January 1, 1959 to March
31, 1960.
This judgment will govern all these appeals
involving a common question.
The Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack,
included in the turnover of the respondent the sale price of jeera, dhania
(coriander), panmohuri, methi, postak and pipall and levied 5 per cent sales
tax under the Orissa Sales Tax Act (briefly the State Act). On appeal the
Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Puri, allowed the claim of the respondent
and held that the above items are oil-seeds within the meaning of section
14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act and gave the respondent the benefit of a
lower tax of 2 per cent on the sale turnover of those goods instead of 5 per
cent under the State Act. On appeal by the State of Orissa to the Sales Tax
Tribunal claiming 5 per cent on the sale turnover thereof under the provisions
of the Central Sales Tax Act, the orders of the Assistant Commissioner were
affirmed. On application by the State for each of the five quarters, the
Tribunal referred the following two common questions under section 24 of the
State Act:
"(1) Whether in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal is right in holding that
jeera, dhania, panmohuri, methi, postak and pipali are oil-seeds within the
meaning of section 14 of the Central Act and the tax payable under the State
Law in respect of the sale or purchase of these goods inside the State, cannot
exceed 2 per cent of the sale or purchase price thereof.
(2) Whether the communication No. 4(8)-ST/57
dated 31st January, 1958, issued by the Government of India which is only an
official communication having no statutory sanction behind it can have any
legal effect to hold the goods in question as oil-seeds as understood in common
parlance and whether such an official communication is binding on the State
Government." We are not concerned with 'pipali' in these appeals.
968 When these appeals came before us for
hearing the respondent was not represented. We, therefore, requested Mr. Gobind
Das to act as amicus curiae in these appeals.
Before we may proceed further, we may
immediately turn to section 14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act (briefly the
Central Act):
"14. Certain goods to be special
importance in inter-State trade or commerce. It is hereby declared that the
following goods are of special importance in inter-State trade or commence:-
(vi) Oil-seeds, that is to say, seeds yielding non-volatile oils used for human
consumption, or in industry, or in the manufacture of varnishes, soaps and the
like, or in lubrication, and volatile oils used chiefly in medicines, perfumes,
cosmetics and the like".
The above definition is an explanatory one
and uses mentioned therein cover a wide range. If the particular items which
are assessed under the State Act can be brought under the definition of
"oil-seeds", as given in the above provision, the assessee will be
entitled to a lower levy of sales tax.
Mr. Mahajan appearing on behalf of the
appellant sumbits that the Court should adopt the meaning given to these items
in common parlance and by the people who use the articles. He chiefly relies
upon a decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in The State of Andhra Pradesh
v. Kajjam Ramchandraiah Gari Anantaiah. In that case the High Court was
dealing, inter alia, with an identical item, viz., dhania (coriander) under
item 3 of Schedule IV of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. Item 3
is identical with item (vi) of section 14 of the Central Act giving the
definition of "oil-seeds". The Andhra Pradesh High Court relied upon
a letter from the Director of the National Chemical Laboratory, Poona, dated
January 29, 1959, addressed to the Secretary, Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research, New Delhi, as also upon another letter from the Central
Food Technological Research Institute, Mysore, dated February 18, 1959, and
came to the conclusion that, amongst other things, dhania (coriander) did not
come "within the definition of oil seeds". The High Court also held
that it was not difficult to envisage with the increase in scientific knowledge
and technological development that oil could be extracted from any seed which
might not be known as an oil-seed in common parlance. That Court also observed
that there was no evidence to show that any oil was extracted in this country
or that the oil extracted from the seeds concerned was used commercially or
industrially or could be bought in the market. In this view of the matter the
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that dhania and other seeds which came up for
consideration were not oil-seeds under item 3 of Schedule IV of the Andhra
Pradesh Sales Tax Act. It is interesting that on this finding of that Court
coriander escaped altogether from assessment.
969 In Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh,
Indore, v. Bakhat Rai and Co., the Madhya Pradesh High Court also took the same
view as that of the Andhra Pradesh High Court while dealing with item 3, Part
II, Schedule 1 of the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act. In the Madhya Pradesh case,
however, the term 'oil-seed' has not been defined under the Act. The Court,
therefore, held that since it was an item of everyday use it must be construed
in its popular meaning, that is to say, in that sense which people conversant
with the subject matter with which the statute was dealing would attribute to
it.
The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court
has also held in The Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales
Tax, Kozikode v. V. Sreedhara Shenoy that dhania (coriander) and methi are not
oil-seeds under section 14(vi) of the Central Act.
Mr. Mahajan has strenuously submitted that
the articles in question are spices to all indents and purposes and not
"oil-seeds". He further submits that even if they are oil- seeds in
the sense that these yield non-volatile oil to a certain extent, no evidence
has been produced by the assessee that these are used for human consumption or
in industry or in the manufacture of varnishes, soaps and the like, or in
lubrication, or in medicines, perfumes, cosmetics and the like as mentioned in
the definition.
Mr. Gobind Das, on the other hand, has drawn
our attention to the fact that the High Court had before it the Condensed
Chemical Dictionary (7th Edition) edited by Arther and Elizabeth Rose, from
which the following informations regarding the seeds in question were
available:- "Dhania (coriander seed); botanical name coriandrum sativem.
Coriander oil is distilled from the coriander sativum a colourless or slightly
yellowish, liquid having aromatic odour.
Jeera (cumin seed); Cumin oil is distilled
from the cumin seed and is used for medicine, flavouring and perfumery. It is a
colourless or yellowish, limpid liquid having characteristic odour of cumin.
Postak (poppy seed); botanical name papover
somniferum. Poppy oil is a very pale, golden yellow liquid with pleasant taste
and odour extracted from the seeds and it is used as food oil, artist's
colours, varnishes & lubrication.
Methi (Fenugreek); botanical name trigonella
Foenumgraecum (vide p. 164, vol. 9 of the Encyclopaedia Britannica). It is
stated inter alia therein that it bears a sickle-shaped pod, containing from 10
to 20 seeds, from which 6% of a foetid, fatty, and bitter oil can be extracted
by ether".
Besides, the High Court also had before it
the notification of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs,
Government of India, dated January 3, 1959, wherein amongst other commodities
970 the following were stated to be included in the term "oil- seeds"
under item (vi) of section 14 of the Central Act:
"(18)Poppy-seed (Posta-dana, Khaskhas);
(37) Aniseed (saunf);
(42) Coriander-seeds (Dhania);
(44) Cuminseed (Jeera, Safed Jeera);
(49) Fenugreek-seeds (Methi)".
Mr. Gobind Das also drew our attention to the
Webster's Third International Dictionary where coriander seed is described as
"the ripened dried fruit of coriander used for flavouring especially of
pickels, curries, confectioneries, and liquors." These appeals arise out
of a decision in a reference under section 24 of the State Act under article
136 of the Constitution and we have to consider whether it is a fit case for
interference with the order of the High Court when it held that the Sales Tax
Tribunal was right in its conclusion. It is true the High Court has rightly
observed that the aforesaid notification of the Government of India has no
statutory force and as such is not binding on the Sales Tax Officer. It cannot,
however, be denied that the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic
Affairs, is intimately conversant not only with the policy of legislation for
the purpose of implementation of the provisions of the Central Act but is also
familiar with the nature and quality of the commodities as also their use from
time to time. If, therefore, such an authority issued a notification including
certain commodities under the head of 'oil-seeds', as defined under the Central
Act, it cannot be said that the Tribunal and the High Court were not right in
preferring such an opinion of the Government as good evidence for its
conclusion, to the opinions relied upon by the Andhra Pradesh High Court on
which great reliance has been placed by the appellant. A persual of the
contents of the letters referred to in the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High
Court would indicate that the opinions cannot be said to be very firm or even
final. Apart from this, it is not known whether all the uses which are
mentioned in the definition of "oil-seeds" were brought to the notice
of the National Chemical Laboratory, Poona and of the Central Food Technological
Research Institute, Mysore, in rendering their opinions. If, therefore, the
Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case held that the particular
commodities came within the definition of clause (vi) of section 14 of the
Central Act, it is not possible to hold that it was not right. The answer to
the first question by the High Court is, therefore, rightly in the affirmative.
We do not also see anything wrong in the High
Court's answering the second question in the way it did.
The appeals, therefore, fail and are
dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
We are thankful to Mr. Gobind Das for
assisting the Court as amicus curaie.
V.P.S. Appeals dismissed.
Back
