Common parlance classification of bura as sugar defeated the sales tax levy and sustained writ maintainability.

A writ petition challenging a sales tax levy on the ground of lack of jurisdiction was held maintainable despite unexhausted statutory remedies, because the exhaustion rule is a matter of practice, not jurisdiction. On classification, where the Act did not define "sugar", the commodity had to be understood in its common parlance sense. Applying that test, bura was treated as a form of sugar used as a sweetening agent and supported by treatment in other enactments and control orders. The sales tax notices, assessment orders, and appellate order were quashed, and the levy on bura sugar could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the petition was maintainable despite the availability of statutory remedies, where the challenge was to the very jurisdiction of the sales tax authority; (ii) whether bura is sugar and therefore exempt from sales tax under item 9 of the Second Schedule to the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941.

Issue (i): whether the petition was maintainable despite the availability of statutory remedies, where the challenge was to the very jurisdiction of the sales tax authority.

Analysis: A rule requiring exhaustion of statutory remedies is one of practice and not of jurisdiction. Where the assessee directly questions the authority's jurisdiction to levy tax, the High Court may entertain the writ petition notwithstanding that further departmental remedies might exist.

Conclusion: The objection based on non-exhaustion of alternative remedies was rejected, and the writ petition was held maintainable.

Issue (ii): whether bura is sugar and therefore exempt from sales tax under item 9 of the Second Schedule to the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941.

Analysis: The word "sugar" was not defined in the Act, so it had to be understood in its common parlance sense. On that approach, bura is commonly understood as bura chini and is used as a sweetening agent. The Court also relied on the treatment of sugar in other enactments and control orders, including the statutory descriptions of sugar as any form containing more than 90 per cent sucrose and the express inclusion of bura sugar in those regimes. Those materials supported the conclusion that bura is a form of sugar and not a distinct taxable commodity outside the exempt entry.

Conclusion: Bura was held to be sugar within item 9 of the Second Schedule, and the sales tax notices, assessment orders, and appellate order were quashed.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded, the levy on bura sugar could not be sustained, and the impugned tax demands and related orders were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing entry uses an undefined everyday expression, the commodity must be classified according to its common parlance meaning, and a writ challenging the very jurisdiction of the taxing authority is maintainable despite unexhausted statutory remedies.

---