1988 (9) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....otton yarn " as described in item 43 of Schedule III to the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947, includes cotton yarn waste and is exempted from taxation under the Act? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, section 19A of the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947, can be applied to reopen the completed assessment? The Assam Board of Revenue considered the subject-matter of the three questions in cases Nos. 29 STA/70 to 38 STA/70 on March 11, 1970, and held that cotton waste is different from cotton and cotton yarn waste is different from cotton yarn. The Board stated to have followed the earlier decision. The judgment of the Board on March 11, 1970, is not made available in the record. The counsel for the parties have not produced....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd cotton yarn waste are specified goods and are identified by the name. Therefore, he contended, cotton yarn waste is different from cotton yarn and cotton waste is different from cotton. These two goods, the counsel urged, can be sold, can be purchased in the markets. Therefore, his argument was cotton waste is a separate commodity from cotton and similarly cotton yarn waste is a separate commodity from cotton yarn and cited two decisions [1988] 71 STC 362 (Gauhati); [1988] 1 GLJ NOC 25 (Modern Candle Works v. Commissioner of Taxes, Assam, Gauhati), and [1972] 29 STC 730 (P & H) (Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd v. State of Haryana). The question in the instant references is not whether there can be a business in cotton waste or in cotton yarn ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on. Further it added cotton waste is not a bye-product but it is a residue of ginned cotton. We have referred to this decision to understand the ramification of the two expressions "cotton" and "cotton waste". We see in the case of [1978] 41 STC 394 (SC) (Alladi Venkateswarlu v. Government of A.P.), various tests have been laid by the Supreme Court in identifying the commodities. The question in that case related to paddy, rice, parched rice and puffed rice and how to identify the four commodities. The first test the Supreme Court laid down (a) unless the language of the taxing statute was absolutely clear obviously unfair interpretation against the assessee should not be adopted by the courts, (b) when two interpretations of the provisi....