Agricultural produce exemption for entry tax depends on proof of cultivation, with the dealer bearing the burden of proof.

Tendu leaves imported as raw material were held to qualify as agricultural produce only if the dealer proves they were raised by cultivation or other primary agricultural operations on the land; spontaneous or wild growth is not enough. For entry tax exemption, the statute places the burden on the dealer to show that the goods brought into the local area are not taxable, and an administrative circular cannot override that requirement. The writ petitions therefore ended without a final determination on exemption, with liberty to the petitioners to produce admissible evidence before the assessing authority.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether tendu leaves imported for use as raw material could be treated as agricultural produce so as to claim exemption from entry tax under the Act; (ii) on whom the burden lay to prove that the goods were not liable to tax.

Issue (i): whether tendu leaves imported for use as raw material could be treated as agricultural produce so as to claim exemption from entry tax under the Act.

Analysis: The classification of a produce as agricultural depends on the nature of the operations carried on the land for raising it. Products that grow spontaneously or wild without human labour or skill are not agricultural produce. Tendu leaves are not agricultural produce in every case; they may qualify only if the materials placed before the assessing authority establish that they were raised by cultivation or similar primary operations on the land.

Conclusion: The claim of exemption was not finally accepted or rejected on facts, and the petitioners were left to prove that the tendu leaves were agricultural produce.

Issue (ii): on whom the burden lay to prove that the goods were not liable to tax.

Analysis: The Act places the burden on the dealer to establish that goods brought into the local area are not liable to tax. Any departmental circular contrary to the statute cannot bind the assessing authority, and the dealer must satisfy the authority by admissible and reliable evidence.

Conclusion: The burden of proof was held to lie on the petitioners.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions ended with liberty to the petitioners to produce evidence before the assessing authority to establish entitlement to exemption, without a conclusive adjudication on tax liability.

Ratio Decidendi: A claim of exemption from entry tax on the basis that goods are agricultural produce must be proved by the dealer, and such produce qualifies only if it is shown to have resulted from agricultural operations rather than spontaneous growth.

---