Undefined taxing entry for "fish" excludes prawn and shrimp where legislation treats them as distinct commodities.

Where a taxing entry uses the undefined term "fish," its scope must be determined from legislative context, trade parlance and the statutory classification adopted elsewhere. Because shrimp and prawn were separately treated as distinct commodities in related fiscal statutes and the Revenue did not establish that they fall within the commercial or statutory meaning of fish, they could not be brought within the schedule by implication. Cess was therefore not leviable on their export under the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940.

---

---

Issues: Whether "fish" in Item No. 7 of the schedule to the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940 includes prawn and shrimp, so as to attract cess under Section 3 of that Act on their export.

Analysis: The levy under Section 3 of the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940 applies only to scheduled articles. The expression "fish" is not defined in that Act, so its scope had to be gathered from legislative intent, commercial understanding, and the statutory context. The Marine Products Export Development Authority Act, 1972 treats shrimp, prawn and fish as distinct commercial items in the definition of "marine products" and separately subjects marine products to cess under Section 14 of that Act. The Customs Tariff Act, 1975 also classifies fish and shrimp/prawn under different headings, reinforcing that they are distinct for fiscal purposes. Scientific material and expert opinions placed on record further showed that fish and shrimp/prawn belong to different biological categories. On the material before the Tribunal, the Revenue did not establish that prawn or shrimp could be treated as "fish" under the APC Act.

Conclusion: "Fish" in the schedule to the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940 does not include prawn or shrimp, and cess is not leviable on their export under Section 3 of that Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing entry uses an undefined expression, its scope must be determined by legislative context, common and trade parlance, and the statutory classification adopted by the legislature; if the legislature separately identifies the goods elsewhere as distinct commodities, they cannot be brought within the taxing entry by implication.

---