Standing trees sold for severance may be taxed as goods, while "flowers and plants" exemption is construed narrowly.

For sales tax purposes, standing trees sold on the footing that they would be severed under the contract may be treated as goods, because the taxable transfer occurs only after severance and not as an interest in immovable property. The exemption entry for "flowers and plants" was construed in its popular and commercial sense, so it did not extend to large standing trees. Shade trees planted to support tea cultivation were treated as ancillary or incidental to the tea business, making the seller a dealer in respect of that transaction.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether standing trees sold after being severed by the purchaser were "goods" exigible to sales tax under the State Act; (ii) whether standing trees fell within the tax-free entry for "flowers and plants" in Schedule I; and (iii) whether the sale of shade trees was ancillary or incidental to the applicant's business of selling tea.

Issue (i): whether standing trees sold after being severed by the purchaser were "goods" exigible to sales tax under the State Act.

Analysis: The definition of "goods" in the State Act was controlling, and the meaning of "movable property" had to be gathered from the Bengal General Clauses Act, 1899. Standing trees rooted in the earth are attached to the earth and are not movable property. Yet the real nature of the transaction was examined: the sale was made on the footing that the trees would be cut and severed pursuant to the contract, and the taxable transfer of property took place only upon severance. On that footing, the transaction was not a transfer of an interest in immovable property, but a sale of chattel.

Conclusion: The sale was exigible to sales tax and the contention that the trees were not goods failed.

Issue (ii): whether standing trees fell within the tax-free entry for "flowers and plants" in Schedule I.

Analysis: The word "plant" was construed in its popular and commercial sense, not in a purely botanical sense. Applying noscitur a sociis, the association of "flowers" with "plants" indicated a restricted meaning in the statutory entry, one that would not ordinarily extend to big standing trees. The broader scientific meaning of plant was therefore rejected for the purpose of the exemption entry.

Conclusion: Standing trees were not covered by entry 47 and no tax exemption was available.

Issue (iii): whether the sale of shade trees was ancillary or incidental to the applicant's business of selling tea.

Analysis: Shade trees were planted to protect tea bushes and were integral to the plantation and production activity connected with tea business. A transaction connected with or incidental to the main business can amount to business even if it lacks the usual features of frequency or regularity. The sale of such trees was therefore treated as part of the applicant's business activity.

Conclusion: The sale of shade trees was ancillary or incidental to the applicant's business, and the applicant was a dealer in respect of that transaction.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the levy did not succeed on any of the substantive grounds examined, and the application was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: For sales tax purposes, the statutory definition in the taxing enactment governs; where standing trees are sold under an arrangement requiring severance before transfer, the transaction may be treated as a taxable sale of goods, and exemption entries must be construed in their popular statutory context.

---