TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
The doctrine of noscitur a sociis is an important principle of interpretation in any tax law and has been applied in number of cases by various High Courts and Supreme Court. In this rule of construction, a word is to be just by the company it keeps and it is considered to be rule of construction to construe words in any legislation with reference to words found in immediate connection with them.
The following judicial pronouncements are relevant in this regard:
- In M/s Biostadt India Ltd Unit II Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T., Jammu & Kashmir - 2022 (1) TMI 358 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH, it was held that legitimate rule of construction to construe words in an Act of Parliament with reference to words found in immediate connection with them i.e. when two or more words which are susceptible of analogous meaning are clubbed together, they are understood to be used in their cognate sense. This is what can be interpreted by principle of noscitur a sociis.
- In M/s. PARLE AGRO (P) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM, M/s. WE SIX TRADERS ETC. ETC. Versus COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER & ANR. AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) & ANR. Versus M/s. PARLE AGRO (P) LTD. - 2017 (5) TMI 592 - Supreme Court, the court examined the applicability of Doctrine of Noscitur a Sociis in a matter of classification of goods. The court observed and held as under:—
“40.The appellants before the Committee of Commissioners as well as High Court have pleaded that Entry 71 Item 5 mentioned “similar other products not specifically mentioned under any other entry in this list or any other schedule”, was required to be considered in the light of commodities as included in other items mentioned in Entry 71. It was submitted that ‘Appy Fizz’ which is a fruit juice based drink is more akin to other commodities included in the Entry 71 other than that which was included in Section 6(1)(a). In interpreting Item 5 of Entry 71 the doctrine of ‘noscitur a sociis’ is fully attracted. Justice G.P. Singh in ‘Principles of Statutory Interpretation, 14th Edition, has explained the ‘noscitur a sociis’ in the following words:
“(b) Noscitur a Sociis
The rule of construction noscitur a sociis as explained by LORD MAC-MILLAN means: “The meaning of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps”. As stated by the Privy Council: “It is a legitimate rule of construction to construe words in an Act of Parliament with reference to words found in immediate connection with them”. It is a rule wider than the rule of ejusdem generis; rather the latter rule is only an application of the former. The rule has been lucidly explained by GAJENDERAGADKAR, J., in the following words: “This rule, according to MAXWELL, means that when two or more words which are susceptible of analogous meaning are coupled together, they are understood to be used in their cognate sense. They take as it were their colour from each other, that is, the more general is restricted to a sense analogous to a less general. The same rule is thus interpreted in Words and Phrases.” “Associated words take their meaning from one another under the doctrine of noscitur a sociis, the philosophy of which is that the meaning of the doubtful word may be ascertained by reference to the meaning of words associated with it; such doctrine is broader than the maxim ejusdem generis.” In fact the latter maxim “is only an illustration or specific application of the broader maxim noscitur a sociis’. It must be boren in mind that noscitur a sociis, is merely a rule of construction and it cannot prevail in cases where it is clear that the wider words have been deliberately used in order to make the scope of the defined word correspondingly wider. It is only where the intention of the Legislature in associating wider words with words of narrower significance is doubtful, or otherwise not clear that the present rule of construction can be usefully applied.”
41.This Court in Pardeep Aggarbatti Versus State of Punjab and Others (and other appeals) - 1997 (10) TMI 338 - Supreme Court, considering Entry 16 of Schedule A of Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, in paragraph 9 has laid down following:
“9.Entries in the Schedules of Sales tax and Excise statutes list some articles separately and some articles are grouped together. When they are grouped together, each word in the Entry draws colour from the other words therein. This is the principle of noscitur a sociis.”
42.Applying the aforesaid principle of construction of ‘noscitur a sociis’ on Entry 71, it is clear that Item 5 of Entry 71 has to take colour and meaning from the other items included in Entry 71. Item 5 of Entry 71 uses the words “similar other products not specifically mentioned under any other entry in this list or any other schedule”. Thus, the products which are to be covered under Item No. 5 are similar other products. When Item No. 2 of the Entry 71 that is fruit juice, fruit concentrates, fruit squash, fruit syrup and pulp, and fruit cordial and item No. 4 that is health drinks of all varieties, are kept in mind the fruit juice based drink shall fall in Item No. 5. Both High Court and Committee of Commissioners overlooked this principle while interpreting Item No. 5 of Entry 71.”
- In M/s Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. & Others Versus CST, Delhi & Others. - 2013 (9) TMI 294 - CESTAT NEW DELHI-LB,it was observed that the principle of Noscitur A Sociis (a latin maxim) implies that an Act or other legislative instrument is to be read as a whole, so that enactment within it is not treated as standing alone but is interpreted in its context, as part of instrument. The bench observed as under:—
'This principle is part of linguistic cannons of construction which govern elaboration of the meaning of individual words and phrases by drawing certain inferences. Noscitur is the genius of a family of principles embedded in well-known latin maxims. The general principle of construction is that an Act or other legislative instrument is to be read as a whole, so that the enactment within it is not treated as standing alone but is interpreted in its context, as part of the instrument. The noscitur principle posits that a statutory term is recognised by its associated words i.e. in an associational context, whereby the word or phrase is not construed as if stood alone but in the light of its surroundings. An associated principle states: Noscitur ex socio, qui non cognoscitur ex se (what cannot be known in itself may be known from its associate). Lord Diplock cautioned that the maxim noscitur sociis is always a treacherous one unless you know the societas to which the socii belong - Liteteng v Cooper (1965) 1 QB 232.The latin word societas means 'society' and the nature of the intended society (if any) can only be gathered from the words used. There may not be any precise intention, but the colour of the members of the society (socii) is nevertheless an approximate indication of meaning. As Bennion (supra) points out, Maxwell explained that the principle means that when two or more words which are susceptible of analogous meaning are coupled together, they are understood to be used in their cognate sense. They take, as it were their colour from each other, that is, the more general is restricted to a sense analogous on to a less general. This exposition of the principle was quoted with approval by Gajendragadkar J in STATE OF BOMBAY & OTHERS Versus THE HOSPITAL MAZDOOR SABHA & OTHERS - 1960 (1) TMI 32 - Supreme Court'
- Doctrine of Noscitur a Sociis is applicable only when language of statute is ambiguous. In M/s Vinayak Industries Versus CCE & ST, Jaipur-I - 2016 (6) TMI 1072 - CESTAT NEW DELHI, language of Note 6 of Chapter 4 of Central Excise Tariff was clear enough to include ‘any other treatment to render product marketable’ which would include process of chilling of milk also. Confining scope of ‘any other treatment’ to ‘labelling/re-labelling or packing/re-packing’ on basis of aforesaid principle was not proper.
- In Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Ltd. - 2006 (11) TMI 197 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, the principle 'noscitur a sociis' is a well accepted principle for interpretation of entries in a taxing statute. Any commodity mentioned in any entry gets its colour from the commodities or thing mentioned either before or after the particular item for the purpose of assigning it a correct meaning.