Exemption notification interpretation: later amendment showed besan manufacturing was not covered by "flour mill," making denial unsustainable.

A unit manufacturing besan from dal was held not to fall within the earlier expression "flour mill" for purposes of a sales tax exemption notification. The later 28 April 1992 notification, which separately added "units manufacturing besan out of dal" as an ineligible category, was treated as a valid aid to interpret the earlier entry and showed that such units were not intended to be covered by it. The unit was therefore entitled to exemption from the date of commercial production, and the reassessment notice and consequential orders denying exemption were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a unit manufacturing besan out of dal falls within the expression "flour mill" so as to be excluded from exemption under the sales tax incentive notification, and whether the reassessment notice and consequential orders denying exemption were valid.

Analysis: The unit had been granted eligibility certificates and had commenced commercial production from 4 February 1989. The later notification dated 28 April 1992 specifically introduced "units manufacturing besan out of dal" as an additional ineligible category. That later insertion showed that such units were not intended to be covered by the earlier expression "flour mill". A subsequent amendment or entry may be used as an aid to interpret the earlier notification. The view that besan manufacturing was already included in "flour mill" was therefore not sustainable.

Conclusion: The expression "flour mill" does not include a unit manufacturing besan out of dal, and the petitioner was entitled to the exemption from the date of commercial production. The notice and consequential assessment orders were unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the impugned tax proceedings were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A later amendment introducing a specific ineligible category can be relied upon to construe an earlier exemption entry, and where the later entry shows that a distinct activity was separately identified, the earlier general expression should not be expanded to include it.

---