Exhaustive tariff entry interpretation excluded tooth-paste and tooth-brushes from sales tax coverage under the earlier wording.

Entry 36 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, as it stood before 1 September 1976, was construed as an exhaustive enumeration because the words "cosmetics and toilet preparations, namely" were restrictive. On that construction, tooth-paste and tooth-brushes were outside the entry, and the levy made under it for the earlier period was invalid. The Court applied the common parlance approach and noted that tooth-paste was not understood as "cream" or "pomade" within the listed items. It also treated the later substitution of "including" for "namely" as confirming that the original wording was limiting rather than illustrative.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the proper construction of entry 36 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as it stood prior to 1 September 1976, the words "cosmetics and toilet preparations, namely" constituted an exhaustive enumeration so as to exclude tooth-paste and tooth-brushes from the entry and render the levy under the entry unlawful for the prior period.

Analysis: The expression "namely" was held to be restrictive and exhaustive, confining the general words "cosmetics and toilet preparations" to the specific articles enumerated after it. The Court contrasted this expression with "including", which is ordinarily illustrative, and noted that the legislature itself later substituted "including" for "namely" in the same entry, confirming the distinction. Applying the common parlance rule, tooth-paste was not treated as "cream" or "pomade" within the enumerated items. The earlier view based on a different sales tax entry using the word "including" was held inapplicable, and the board's circular also supported the view that these goods were general goods before 1 September 1976.

Conclusion: Tooth-paste and tooth-brushes were not covered by entry 36 before 1 September 1976, and the tax levied on them under that entry for the prior period was invalid.

---