1980 (1) TMI 173

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... unmarried. In revision, this finding was not set aside but it was held as an unclassified item because the department did not press its claim in respect of tikuli before the Full Bench in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Jai Shri Products[1974] 34 S.T.C. 494 (F.B.); 1974 U.P.T.C. 146 (F.B.). The rationale of the order is patently erroneous. How could a concession by the standing counsel amount to a declaration of law? What was not pressed before the Full Bench might have resulted in finality of judgment between the assessee and the department but it did not become a ratio decidendi that tikuli was not cosmetic requisite. The learned counsel for the assessee attempted to support the order and urged that in view of the following observatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. The Full Bench in Jai Shri Products(1) held: "The expression 'cosmetics and toilet requisites' has not been defined in the Act so that it shall have to be understood as in common parlance." After laying down this principle the Full Bench proceeded to decide the meaning of the word "cosmetic" in the light of various dictionary meanings which can only be a guide and cannot be decisive about the popular meaning of a particular item in common parlance. In respect of articles which are typical to Indian society it might not be safe to rely on the dictionary meaning given in Webster or Oxford. An item like tikuli may be unknown in European society. To take guidance therefore from dictionaries or Encyclopaedia Britannica would be falli....