Tax exemption by incorporated definition fails where rubber beltings acquire a distinct commercial identity and cease to be cotton fabrics.

Rubber beltings marketed as Hind rubber belting and Cooper rubber belting were held not to fall within entry 15 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as "cotton fabrics". The incorporated definition required a fabric manufactured wholly or partly from cotton, but the beltings were made by superimposing rubber on completed canvas and did not answer that description. The process was not incidental or ancillary to the manufacture of canvas under the excise definition, and the finished goods acquired a distinct commercial identity. Legislative history and later excise notifications could not widen the plain meaning of the incorporated definition, so the exemption was unavailable and the sales remained taxable.

---

---

Issues: Whether rubber beltings marketed as Hind rubber belting and Cooper rubber belting were covered by entry 15 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as "cotton fabrics" defined by reference to item 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

Analysis: The definition incorporated by reference required the article to be a fabric manufactured wholly or partly from cotton. The Court held that rubber beltings, though made on canvas, were not manufactured wholly or partly from cotton directly. The process of superimposing rubber on completed canvas was not incidental or ancillary to the manufacture of canvas under section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The resulting article had a different commercial identity and could no longer be treated as canvas or as a cotton fabric within the statutory definition. Legislative history and later excise notifications could not enlarge the plain meaning of the incorporated definition, and an exemption had to be strictly brought within its terms.

Conclusion: Rubber beltings were not cotton fabrics within entry 15 of Schedule A and the exemption was not available.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered against the assessee on the substantive tax classification issue, leaving the sales of the rubber beltings liable to tax under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing entry incorporates another statute's definition by reference, the exempt article must satisfy that definition on its own terms, and a product that acquires a new commercial character after a non-incidental superimposed process ceases to fall within the exemption.

---