Common parlance test classifies tooth powder as a toilet requisite, attracting single-point tax treatment.

Tooth powder was classified in its popular and common parlance sense as a cosmetic or toilet requisite because the Act did not define those terms and the article is used for personal grooming and cleansing. Applying the settled common parlance test and noting support from other High Courts, it was treated as a toilet good rather than an unspecified commodity. It was therefore liable to tax at the single point under the relevant sales tax provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether tooth powder manufactured by the assessee was a cosmetic or toilet requisite taxable at single point, or an unspecified commodity taxable under the general charging provision.

Analysis: The expression "cosmetic" and "toilet requisite" were not defined in the Act, so the goods had to be understood in their popular sense as used in common parlance. The ordinary meaning of "cosmetic", "toilet" and "toiletry" supported the view that tooth powder is an article used in personal grooming and cleansing. Applying the settled common parlance test, and noting that other High Courts had taken the same view, tooth powder was treated as falling within the category of toilet goods rather than as an unspecified commodity.

Conclusion: Tooth powder was rightly classified as a toilet requisite or cosmetic and was liable to tax at the single point under section 3-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

---