Common parlance test limits undefined taxing entries; hardship alone cannot annul otherwise valid tax assessments.

Where a taxing entry is undefined, its scope is determined by common parlance and trade understanding. On that basis, thermometers, lactometers, syringes, eye-wash glasses and measuring glasses were treated as not ordinarily understood as "glassware" within the relevant taxable entry, despite glass components in some items. The note also states that assessments on sale of plastic rubbers and plastic pieces could not be annulled merely because the turnover was small or reassessment would cause hardship, since established tax liability cannot be avoided on that ground.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether thermometers, lactometers, syringes, eye-wash glasses and measuring glasses fall within the ambit of serial No. 38 of the schedule of taxable goods as glassware; (ii) Whether assessments in respect of sale of plastic rubbers and plastic pieces could be annulled on the ground of hardship.

Issue (i): Whether thermometers, lactometers, syringes, eye-wash glasses and measuring glasses fall within the ambit of serial No. 38 of the schedule of taxable goods as glassware.

Analysis: In the absence of a statutory definition, the expression had to be understood in its common parlance and trade sense. Articles ordinarily understood as glassware are articles made of glass in the general commercial sense, and specialised medical instruments such as thermometers, lactometers and syringes are not ordinarily treated as glassware. Though some of these articles contain glass components, their marketable identity and utility are determined by other constituent materials as well, and eye-wash glasses and measuring glasses, though made of glass, are not understood in common use as glassware.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was correct in holding that those articles do not come within serial No. 38 of the schedule of taxable goods.

Issue (ii): Whether assessments in respect of sale of plastic rubbers and plastic pieces could be annulled on the ground of hardship.

Analysis: Plastic rubbers and plastic pieces were accepted as plastic articles falling within the relevant notification and liable to tax at the applicable higher rate. The Tribunal's annulment of assessment on the ground that the turnover was small and that reassessment would cause hardship was inconsistent with settled principles of tax assessment, because legitimate tax liability cannot be avoided merely due to the quantum involved or on a notion of hardship.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not entitled to annul the assessments in respect of sale of plastic rubbers and plastic pieces on the ground of hardship.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by upholding the assessee's contention on the glassware issue and rejecting the hardship-based annulment on the plastic goods issue, resulting in a mixed outcome.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing entry is undefined, its scope must be determined by the common parlance and trade understanding of the goods, and assessments cannot be annulled merely on the ground of hardship where taxable liability is otherwise established.

---