Statutory definition limits "dealer" under sales tax law; reseller excluded from penalty and collection prohibition.

The expression "dealer" in section 8G of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act was construed by reference to the statutory definition in section 2(b), because the Act showed no contextual repugnancy. The scheme of the Act treated manufacturers and importers as dealers at the first point of sale, while resellers were dealt with separately; accordingly, section 8G was confined to persons falling within the defined class and did not extend by implication to a mere reseller who was not a manufacturer, maker, processor, or importer. On that reading, the prohibition on collection and the penalty provision could not be applied against such resellers.

---

---

Issues: Whether a reseller of notified commodities fell within the expression "dealer" in section 8G of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954, and whether the penalty imposed under section 8G(3) was sustainable.

Analysis: Section 8G was held to operate in the context of the definition of "dealer" in section 2(b) of the 1954 Act. The defining provision applied unless the subject or context showed repugnancy, and no such repugnancy was found. The Act treated manufacturers or importers as dealers for the first point of sale, while resellers were separately recognised in other provisions of the Act. Reading section 8G with the scheme of the Act, the expression "dealer" in that section was confined to persons within section 2(b), and it did not extend to a mere reseller who was not a manufacturer, maker, processor, or importer. On that construction, the statutory prohibition on collection and the penalty provision could not be invoked against the applicants.

Conclusion: Section 8G(3) did not apply to the applicants, and the penalty order and consequential demand notice were liable to be quashed.

Dissenting Opinion: One Member held that section 8G was constitutionally valid and that the applicants, as resellers, fell within the first part of section 8G(1); on that view, the penalty and demand notice were valid.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory context shows no repugnancy, a defined expression in a fiscal statute must be construed in accordance with its statutory definition, and it cannot be enlarged by implication to include a class of persons whom the Act separately treats differently.

---