https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163434 In interpreting a taxing entry covering bicycles, tricycles, perambulators and their accessories, the common parlance and commercial sense test governed, not dictionary meaning. On that approach, a rickshaw was treated as distinct from a tricycle, and contemporaneous notification language separately referring to cycle rickshaws supported that distinction. Super heavy duty rickshaw tubes were also described as different from ordinary cycle tubes because they were manufactured for the greater load borne by rickshaws. As a result, rickshaw tubes fell outside the notified class of goods, so the penalty under section 4B was held valid and the challenge failed. en-us Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Apr 2014 15:31:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163434 In interpreting a taxing entry covering bicycles, tricycles, perambulators and their accessories, the common parlance and commercial sense test governed, not dictionary meaning. On that approach, a rickshaw was treated as distinct from a tricycle, and contemporaneous notification language separately referring to cycle rickshaws supported that distinction. Super heavy duty rickshaw tubes were also described as different from ordinary cycle tubes because they were manufactured for the greater load borne by rickshaws. As a result, rickshaw tubes fell outside the notified class of goods, so the penalty under section 4B was held valid and the challenge failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163434