TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (2) TMI 561
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1941 Act in respect of sales of green tea for Rs. 5,54,338 on the ground that green tea is covered by the expression "flowers and plants" as appearing in entry No. 47 of Schedule I to the 1941 Act. The applicant in its return determined its taxable turnover at Rs. 26,605.93, paying sales tax of Rs. 243.40 and admitting purchase tax of Rs. 988.02 and turnover tax of Rs. 266.06. But the Commercial Tax Officer (the respondent No. 1) assessed the sales tax at Rs. 11,128.41, purchase tax at Rs. 994.48 and turnover tax at Rs. 5,543.37 and also levied penalty for late submission of return. He disallowed the claim of exemption of sales tax on the sales of green tea but allowed the applicant's alternative claim for the concenssional rate of sale tax on sales of green tea leaves to the registered dealer against declaration forms. Applicant filed an appeal against the assessment order. The appellate authority (respondent No. 2) by his order dated March 27, 1992 affirmed the assessment order negating the applicant's specific plea of exemption from sales tax on the sales of green tea. The appellate authority, however, set aside assessment of taxable specified purchase price and accepted the fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....learned Advocate for the applicant, has kept his argument confined to the applicant's stand relating to (1) sale of green tea leaves (in short, "G.T.Ls."), (2) levy of interest; and (3) imposition of penalty. Shri Chakraborty in tune with the averments made in the application has contended that since sale of plant is not taxable in terms of entry 47 of the First Schedule and G.T.Ls. being parts of plant, there was no question of imposing tax on their (G.T.Ls.) sales. He is also of the opinion that since G.T.Ls. are sold in unprocessed condition, just after plucking, as agricultural produce the applicant is entitled to enjoy tax exemption on such sales under entry 47 of the First Schedule read with section 6 of the 1941 Act. According to him, therefore, the assessing officer was wrong in imposing tax on sales of G.T.Ls. 7.. Entry 47 of the First Schedule runs thus: "47. Flowers and plants". The 1941 Act has not defined the words "flowers" and "plants" individually or the expression "flowers and plants" as a whole. So, to construe the scope of expression we shall have to look to the appropriate canons of interpretation. In a recent decision in case No. RN-83 of 1997 (Gopal D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tax whose primary object is to raise revenue and for which to classify diverse products, articles and substance, resort should be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of substance but to their popular meaning, viz., the meaning attached to these expressions by those dealing in them." 10.. Following this principle it can be said that whenever it becomes necessary to determine whether an undefined expression appearing in a statute takes within its fold another expression to which a particular meaning has been attached in the trade to which the latter is associated or by those dealing in them, the said common or trade parlance meaning is to be attributed to the latter expression in deciding the matter. In the case before us, green tea is the subject-matter of dispute. The expression "green tea" has a meaning of its own in its trade parlance and there is no scope for any confusion. Any one associated with such trade will not ideate G.T.Ls. just as part of comprehensive botanical concept of plants. To them G.T.Ls. are nothing but the raw material for manufacture of tea because that is how they see them in the trade associated with such leaves. He is not interested to know....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Chakraborty counters this point by averring that when the case of Dharmadas Paul [1958] 9 STC 194 (Cal) was decided the expression "flowers and plants" did not figure as entry 47 of the First Schedule. Be that as it may, we have already seen that the 1941 Act does not contain any analogous provision like that of the U.P. Act in regard to agricultural produce and that in view of the specific identity of G.T.Ls. in the common parlance and trade parlance such leaves are not covered by entry 47. 12.. It is worth mentioning that while Mr. Chakraborty does not dispute the exigibility of the processed tea to sales tax, he considers green tea leaves inexigible since it should be treated as parts of plant. We are unable to concur with these incongruous views. It is difficult to conceive that G.T.Ls. remain the parts of a plant, in botanical concept losing their specific identity as tea leaves. Mr. K.K. Saha has pointed out that in the case of Cottanad Plantations Limited v. State of Kerala [1992] 85 STC 40 it was held by the Kerala High Court following the decision in the case of Varkey v. Agricultural Income-tax and Rural Sales Tax Officer [1954] 5 STC 348 (Trav-Co.) that expression "te....