Favourable fiscal classification applied to scientific instruments after restrictive words were omitted from the notification.

Widening a fiscal classification by omitting words that had confined it to instruments used by students showed an intent to cover scientific instruments generally, so the goods were treated as covered by the notification and taxed at the lower rate. Applying the settled rule that, where two fiscal views are possible, the construction beneficial to the assessee must be adopted, the court preferred the broader interpretation. The alternative classification plea based on weights and measures made of metal or alloy was rejected because it had not been raised before the assessing or appellate authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether automatic water level recorder, snow gauge and rain gauge automatic water level recorder were classifiable as scientific instruments under the relevant notification so as to attract tax at 3%, or whether they were unclassified items taxable at 7%.

Analysis: The classification under the amending notification had widened by omission of the words limiting it to instruments used by students, showing legislative intent to cover scientific instruments generally and not merely those used by students. In fiscal interpretation, where two views are possible, the construction beneficial to the assessee is preferred. The alternative plea that the goods fell under weights and measurements made of metal or alloy was rejected because it had not been raised before the assessing authority or the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The goods were held to be classified items covered by the notification and liable to tax at the lower rate.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal classification is widened by omission of restrictive words, the broader beneficial interpretation must prevail, and the assessee is entitled to the lower rate of tax.

---