TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether carbon paper fell within the word "paper" in Notification No. ST-3124/X-1012(4)-1964 dated 01.07.1966 issued under section 3-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. (ii) Whether ribbon was an accessory or a part of a typewriter.
Issue (i): Whether carbon paper fell within the word "paper" in Notification No. ST-3124/X-1012(4)-1964 dated 01.07.1966 issued under section 3-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.
Analysis: The expression "paper" was not defined in the statute or the rules and therefore had to be understood in its popular and commercial sense, having regard to the context. In ordinary parlance, paper means a substance used for writing, printing, packing, drawing, or covering purposes. Carbon paper, though made from tissue paper and used for making copies, is not used for those ordinary purposes and is understood as a specialised copying article.
Conclusion: Carbon paper was not "paper" within the notification and was not liable to tax at the rate applicable to paper under that entry.
Issue (ii): Whether ribbon was an accessory or a part of a typewriter.
Analysis: The same rule of popular construction applied. A thing is not a part of a machine merely because the machine cannot be effectively used without it. Ribbon is separately traded and used with a typewriter, but it does not form an integral constituent of the machine itself.
Conclusion: Ribbon was an accessory and not a part of the typewriter.
Final Conclusion: The levy on carbon paper and ribbon was unsustainable, and the appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Undefined words in a taxing entry are to be construed in their popular or commercial sense, and an article is not to be treated as a part of a machine unless it is an integral constituent rather than a separately identifiable accessory.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
