Common parlance test for timber classification: eucalyptus wood stacks sold as fuel or pulp raw material were not timber.

In a taxing statute, goods must be classified by their common, commercial or popular meaning, not by labels used in tender papers or departmental correspondence. Applying that common parlance test, eucalyptus wood stacks of limited length and girth, sold as fuel wood or pulp raw material after separation from poles and ballies, did not answer the popular meaning of timber, which connotes size, utility and suitability for building or similar uses. Mere origin from eucalyptus trees or the fact that the material was wood did not make it timber. The classification under entry 32A therefore could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether eucalyptus wood stacks sold after separation of poles and ballies were classifiable as timber under entry 32A of Part II of Schedule II to the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, or were outside that entry.

Analysis: In a taxing statute, words of everyday use are to be understood in their common, commercial or popular sense. The description used in tender papers or departmental correspondence was not conclusive. Timber carries a recognised popular meaning, associated with size, utility and suitability for building or similar uses, and not every part of a timber tree necessarily answers that description. The material sold consisted of wood heaps or stacks of limited length and girth, offered as fuel wood or pulp raw material. On those facts, and applying the common parlance test, the goods could not be treated as timber merely because they were wood or because they came from eucalyptus trees.

Conclusion: The goods were not timber within entry 32A and the High Court's classification under that entry could not stand.

---