Balanced feed exemption narrowly construed: feed supplement treated as taxable, and seizure and penalty for missing way bills upheld.

Di-calcium phosphate (animal feed grade) was held not to fall within the exempt entries for "balanced feed for cattle and pig" or "balanced poultry feed" under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994, because balanced feed means a complete multi-ingredient feed and not a nutrient or additive used to supplement ordinary feed. The goods were treated as a separate commercial commodity and therefore remained taxable. As the goods were not exempt, valid way bills were required for importation; seizure for non-production of way bills and the consequential penalties were upheld as lawful. The applications were dismissed and the seizure and penalty proceedings sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether di-calcium phosphate (animal feed grade) falls within the exempt entries "balanced feed for cattle and pig" and "balanced poultry feed" in Schedule I to the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. (ii) Whether the seizure of the goods and the penalties imposed for want of valid way bills were lawful.

Issue (i): Whether di-calcium phosphate (animal feed grade) falls within the exempt entries "balanced feed for cattle and pig" and "balanced poultry feed" in Schedule I to the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994.

Analysis: The expression "balanced feed" was held to denote a complete feed made up of multiple ingredients, whereas di-calcium phosphate is only a nutrient or additive used to supplement ordinary feed. The goods were therefore treated as a distinct commercial commodity and not as balanced feed itself. Earlier decisions dealing with broader expressions such as "cattle feed" or specifically inclusive exemption wording were distinguished on that basis.

Conclusion: Di-calcium phosphate (animal feed grade) does not fall within the exempt entries and is not tax-free under those schedule items.

Issue (ii): Whether the seizure of the goods and the penalties imposed for want of valid way bills were lawful.

Analysis: Since the goods were held to be taxable and distinct from the exempted items, way bills were required for their importation. The seizures were made for non-production of valid way bills, and the penalty orders were passed under the statutory provisions governing such contraventions. No separate ground was found to invalidate the seizure or the penalty proceedings.

Conclusion: The seizure and the penalties were valid.

Final Conclusion: The applications failed in full, and the impugned seizure and penalty proceedings were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A product that is only a feed supplement or additive, and not the balanced feed itself, is not covered by an exemption entry for balanced animal feed unless the statute clearly includes it.

---