Ejusdem generis limits land interest exemption under sales tax law; contractual usufruct rights are insufficient.

The proviso to section 2(m) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act applies only where agricultural produce is grown by the dealer himself or on land in which he has an interest as owner, usufructuary mortgagee, tenant, or a similar holder. The Court held that the assessee's contractual right to the usufruct did not amount to an interest in the land itself, and the definition of tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 could not be imported into the sales tax statute. Reading "otherwise" ejusdem generis with the specified classes of land interest, the Court held that exclusive possession of the land was required. The assessee therefore was not entitled to exclude the sale proceeds from turnover.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to exclusion of sale proceeds from turnover under the proviso to section 2(m) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act on the footing that it had an interest in the land or otherwise fell within the proviso.

Analysis: The proviso required that the agricultural produce be grown by the dealer himself or on land in which he had an interest as owner, usufructuary mortgagee, tenant or otherwise. On the terms of the contracts, the assessee had only the exclusive right to the usufruct and not an interest in the land itself. The definition of tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 could not be imported into the sales tax statute. The word "otherwise" in the proviso had to be read ejusdem generis with the specified classes of interest, all of which involved the right to exclusive possession of the land. The corresponding provision in the Madras General Sales Tax Act was treated as pari materia and the view previously taken on that construction was accepted.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to the benefit of the proviso and the challenge to the sales tax assessment failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the proviso, "otherwise" is confined by ejusdem generis to interests in land akin to ownership, usufructuary mortgage, or tenancy, requiring exclusive possession of the land; a mere contractual right to the usufruct is insufficient.

---