Commercial classification of horse gram flour under sales tax entry prevails over exemption, while delayed return penalty was not sustainable.

Horse gram flour was treated as falling within entry 80(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act rather than the exemption notification, because the notification covered cattle feed items such as bran and husk but not gram flour, while the entry expressly included dhalls, brokens and flour of pulses and grams. The classification remained subject to the single-point condition, so the factual question whether the underlying gram had already suffered tax at the first sale had to be examined. Penalty for belated filing of the return was not leviable, because the return was accepted and assessed without best judgment assessment, leaving no statutory basis for penalty on delay.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether horse gram flour fell within the exemption notification issued under section 17 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, or within entry 80(b) of the First Schedule to that Act; (ii) whether penalty could be levied for belated submission of the return.

Issue (i): whether horse gram flour fell within the exemption notification issued under section 17 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, or within entry 80(b) of the First Schedule to that Act.

Analysis: The exemption notification covered cattle feed and specified items such as hay, straw, rice bran, wheat bran, husk and dust of pulses and grams, while excluding brokens of pulses and grams. It did not extend to gram flour or powdered horse gram. Entry 80(a) covered pulses and grams, but in commercial parlance that expression did not include brokens or flour. Entry 80(b), however, expressly included dhalls, parched and fried pulses and grams, their brokens and flour. The only further question was whether the underlying gram had already suffered tax at the first sale, because the entry contemplated single-point taxation.

Conclusion: Horse gram flour fell within entry 80(b) and not within the exemption notification. The matter was remitted to examine whether the underlying gram had suffered tax at the first sale.

Issue (ii): whether penalty could be levied for belated submission of the return.

Analysis: The return included the turnover in horse gram flour as well as other materials. The return had been accepted and assessment made without resort to best judgment assessment. In such circumstances, section 12 did not authorise levy of penalty for delay in filing the return.

Conclusion: Penalty for belated submission of the return was not leviable and the cancellation of penalty was ly upheld.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded only in part on the tax classification question, while the cancellation of penalty was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A product expressly covered by the taxing entry in its commercial sense, and not by the exemption notification, remains taxable subject to the condition of single-point levy, and penalty for delayed return cannot be imposed where the statute does not authorise it after acceptance of the return and assessment on that basis.

---