Ordinary commercial meaning controls exemption classification, while a specific transformer entry overrides the general exemption for machinery.

In construing an exemption notification, the article is classified by its ordinary commercial understanding rather than by possible alternative uses. Pumping sets used for agricultural irrigation were treated as agricultural implements and therefore excluded from the agricultural machinery exemption, while electric motors were held to fall within "machineries and machines" because the notification expressly covered machinery worked by electricity. Electric transformers were treated differently: the later specific entry for transformers was read as a deliberate classification that displaced the general exemption entry, so transformers were excluded from the general exemption. The result was exemption only for electric motors.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether electric pumps sold for irrigation of agricultural land were excluded from exemption as agricultural machinery; (ii) whether electric motors fell within the expression "machineries and machines" in the exemption notification; (iii) whether electric transformers were covered by the general exemption entry or stood excluded because of the specific separate entry for transformers.

Issue (i): whether electric pumps sold for irrigation of agricultural land were excluded from exemption as agricultural machinery.

Analysis: The exemption entry covered all machineries and machines worked by electricity, but specifically excluded agricultural machineries and implements. The controlling test applied was the common use and understanding of the article in the market and in ordinary parlance. On that basis, pumping sets used for agricultural irrigation were treated as agricultural implements, and the existence of possible non-agricultural use did not displace that classification.

Conclusion: The electric pumps used for agricultural irrigation were held to be excluded from exemption and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether electric motors fell within the expression "machineries and machines" in the exemption notification.

Analysis: The entry expressly included machinery worked by electricity, steam, diesel, or petrol. Electric motors were regarded as machinery within the ordinary meaning of that expression, and the broader reading suggested by the revenue was rejected. The specific wording of the notification was treated as sufficient to bring electric motors within the exemption.

Conclusion: Electric motors were held to be covered by the exemption and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): whether electric transformers were covered by the general exemption entry or stood excluded because of the specific separate entry for transformers.

Analysis: The later insertion of a separate entry for electric transformers was treated as a deliberate and purposeful legislative classification. Applying the principle that a special provision prevails over a general one, the separate entry was held to control the subject and to indicate that transformers were not intended to remain within the general exemption entry.

Conclusion: Electric transformers were held not to fall within the general exemption entry and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by granting exemption only in respect of electric motors, while denying it for electric pumps and electric transformers, with each party bearing its own costs.

Ratio Decidendi: In interpreting a taxing exemption, the article must be classified according to its ordinary commercial understanding, and a specific entry prevails over a general entry where both cannot operate together.

---