Purchase tax on groundnuts: pre-1963 "miller" included decorticating millers, and the levy was upheld.

Under the pre-1963 text of item 3-C in Schedule IV of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, a decorticating miller was included within "miller", so purchase tax on groundnuts attached at the first purchase by such miller. The levy had to conform to the Central Sales Tax Act restriction on declared goods, including the limits in section 15 that tax not exceed the prescribed rate and not be imposed at more than one stage. The later 1963 amendment excluding a decorticating miller was treated as a prospective change, not as proof that the earlier entry had excluded such millers. The disputed turnover was therefore validly taxed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under item 3-C of Schedule IV of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as it stood prior to the 1963 amendment, a decorticating miller was included within the expression "miller" so as to attract purchase tax on groundnuts, and whether the levy on the disputed turnover was valid.

Analysis: Groundnuts were declared goods under section 14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the State levy had to conform to the restriction in section 15 that tax should not exceed the prescribed rate and should not be levied at more than one stage. The Court held that the pre-1963 language of item 3-C fixed the point of levy at the purchase by a miller, and that the term "miller" in that context included both a decorticating miller and an oil miller. The Court approved the earlier view that the tax became exigible on the first purchase by such miller, and rejected the later contrary view that had limited the expression to a crushing miller. The 1963 amendment excluding a decorticating miller was treated as a prospective change and not as a declaration that the earlier entry always excluded such millers.

Conclusion: The disputed turnover was rightly subjected to tax, and the challenge to the levy failed.

---