Restricted meaning of "use" controls octroi levy on goods brought for dyeing and re-export without proof of conversion.

Octroi under municipal taxing power was confined by Entry 52 of List II to goods brought into the area for consumption, use or sale, and the word "use" had to be read in that restricted context. Wool imported for dyeing could not be treated as taxable merely because its appearance or market value changed; the decisive question was whether it was brought in for conversion into a different commercial commodity. As the record contained no evidence proving that basis, and the burden to justify the levy rested on the taxing authority, the levy could not be sustained. The matter was set aside and remanded for factual determination.

---

---

Issues: Whether octroi was leviable on wool brought into the notified area for dyeing and re-export, and whether the entry was for "use" within the meaning of the taxing power under the municipal law and the Constitution.

Analysis: The power to levy octroi under the municipal provision was limited by Entry 52 of List II, which permits tax on entry of goods only when the entry is for consumption, use, or sale. The word "use" in that Entry was read in its associated context with "consumption" and "sale", so that it could not be given an unrestricted meaning. The decisive question was whether the wool was brought in so as to be employed in a manner that it became a new or different commercial commodity. The record contained no evidence establishing that the wool imported for dyeing was intended to be converted into a different commercial commodity, and the burden to justify levy of octroi lay on the taxing authority.

Conclusion: Octroi could not be upheld merely on the assumption that dyeing changed the appearance or market value of the wool. The matter required evidence on the factual question whether the wool was imported for conversion into a different commodity, and the existing decision was set aside with remand to the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: For octroi under Entry 52 of List II, the expression "use" must be construed in its contextual and restricted sense, and levy is not sustainable unless the goods are shown on evidence to have been brought in for consumption, use, or sale in the sense of conversion into a different commercial commodity.

---