Common parlance test for sales tax classification places electric fans within electrical goods, not mere appliances.

Where the statute did not define "electrical goods", the ordinary commercial meaning governed classification for sales tax purposes, and electric fans fell within that expression. The court rejected the distinction sought between schedule and notification wording, holding that the notification entry had to be construed in the same common parlance sense. Applying the earlier Division Bench approach, electric fans were not excluded as merely "electrical appliances", so the higher tax treatment could not be sustained on that basis. The questions were answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether electric fans are to be classified as "electrical goods" or "electrical appliances" for sales tax purposes, and whether the October 1996 notification justified levying tax on electric fans at the higher rate.

Analysis: The expression "electrical goods" was not defined in the relevant statutory setting, so the ordinary commercial understanding of the term had to govern. On that approach, electric fans fall within "electrical goods". The contrary distinction drawn by the revisional authority between a schedule entry and a notification entry was not accepted, since the governing expression in the notification was to be construed in the same manner and the earlier Division Bench view applied the common parlance test to hold electric fans within the expression "electrical goods".

Conclusion: The questions were answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue; electric fans were held to be covered by "electrical goods", not excluded as merely "electrical appliances".

---