1987 (9) TMI 393

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") is made by the Board of Revenue at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, referring the following question of law to this Court for decision: "Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that 'scented supari' and 'supari gutka' are nothing but proces....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal, the Tribunal upholding the contention of the assessee, allowed the appeal. The Commissioner of Sales Tax then filed the reference application under section 44(1) of the Act before the Tribunal, pursuant to which, the learned Tribunal has referred the question of law aforesaid for our answer. 3.. Before proceeding to answer the question referred, it would be necessary to reproduce here the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the residuary entry, being goods not included in any other part of Schedule II. 4.. In order to decide the question, it is necessary to ascertain the meaning of the word "processed" which is not defined in the Act. In a Supreme Court case reported in [1981] 47 STC 124 (Chowgule & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India) which has been cited by the learned counsel for the department, their Lordships o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ingredients, namely, dhania and aniseed (saunf) to make it gutka. Scented supari and gutka are nothing but mixtures of certain edible ingredients including supari. A mixture, composition of which includes betel nut as one of the ingredients, cannot be termed as betel nut raw or processed. Therefore, the Board of Revenue, in our opinion was not justified in holding that scented supari and supari g....