Common and commercial meaning governs sales tax exemptions; urad, gram and old gunny bags remained taxable.

Sales tax exemption entries are construed in their common and commercial sense: urad and gram were treated as primarily human food and not cattle feed, so the exemption did not apply. The sale of old gunny bags, sold separately as bardana, was also held taxable because no exemption covered that transaction. On assessment validity, the record lacked a year-wise determination of whether each assessment was legally made under the governing provisions and limitation, so consequential liabilities such as purchase tax, penalty and interest could not be finally sustained without fresh consideration. The assessment issue was therefore remitted for year-wise reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the assessments for the relevant accounting years were validly made and whether the matter required year-wise reconsideration on the basis of the assessment provisions and limitation; (ii) whether urad and gram were cattle feed entitled to exemption and whether sales tax was leviable on the sale of old gunny bags.

Issue (i): whether the assessments for the relevant accounting years were validly made and whether the matter required year-wise reconsideration on the basis of the assessment provisions and limitation.

Analysis: The record did not contain a finding on the validity of each assessment year in the light of the governing provisions. The controversy turned on whether the assessments could be sustained under the relevant assessment machinery and whether limitation applied. The existing order proceeded mainly on the footing that proceedings were not barred by limitation, but it did not record a year-wise determination of the legality of the assessments. As the validity of the levy of purchase tax, penalty and interest depended upon a valid assessment for each year, those questions could not be finally concluded without such a determination.

Conclusion: The assessments were set aside to the extent necessary and the matter was remitted for fresh decision year-wise.

Issue (ii): whether urad and gram were cattle feed entitled to exemption and whether sales tax was leviable on the sale of old gunny bags.

Analysis: Exemption entries in a sales tax enactment are to be construed in their common and commercial sense. Urad and gram were found to be primarily used for human consumption and only incidentally used as ingredients of cattle feed, so they did not answer the description of cattle feed in the exemption entry. As to bardana, the finding was that the goods sold were old gunny bags sold separately, and no statutory exemption covering such sale was shown.

Conclusion: Urad and gram were held not to be cattle feed and were not exempt, and sales tax on the sale of old gunny bags was held leviable.

Final Conclusion: The matter was partly allowed in the sense that the assessment validity aspect was remitted for fresh year-wise determination, while the findings against the dealer on cattle feed exemption and taxability of old gunny bags were maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: In sales tax exemption disputes, commodity entries are interpreted according to their common and commercial understanding, and where year-wise validity of assessments is not conclusively determined, consequential liabilities depending on those assessments cannot be finally sustained.

---