TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (5) TMI 647
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Authority to decide the question whether the petitioner is liable to pay tax in view of Section 184 of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 1989 Act, for short). After remand, the Additional Assessor and Collector passed another assessment order but again without deciding the question whether Section 184 of the 1989 Act was attracted. This Court in Civil Writ No. 1531/2003 quashed the said assessment order and remanded back the matter for determination whether the petitioner is liable to pay tax or is protected under Section 184 of 1989 Act. 2. The assessment order now passed by the Assessor and Collector on 30th March, 2005, in paragraph 3 refers to Section 184 of the 1989 Act, but the entire order is silent and does not specifically deal with the said Section. The Assessor and Collector has examined Section 119 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act and corporate entity of the petitioner, which makes it liable to pay taxes as any other individual or corporate entity, but the main question whether or not Section 184 of the 1989 Act is attracted, is not answered. The simplest course for this Court is to again remand back the matter to the Assessor and Collector....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inistration". This exemption is notwithstanding any other law to the contrary. Thus, notwithstanding the provisions of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, a "railway administration" is not liable to pay tax under the said enactment, in view of Section 184 of the 1989 Act. It may be noted here that the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 is prior in point of time and it was not contended by the respondents that Section 184 of the 1989 Act will not over ride the provisions of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. It is also not the case of the respondents that any notification has been issued by the Central Government under Section 184 of the 1989 Act declaring that the "Railway Administration" is liable to pay tax specified in the notification. 6. The term "railway administration" has been defined in Section 2 (32) of 1989 Act as under: 2(32) "railway administration"' in relation to - (a) a Government railway, means the General Manager of a Zonal Railway; and (b) a non-Government railway, means the person who is the owner or lessee of the railway or the person working the railway under an agreement. 7. The said definition does not in fact specifically define the term ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urpose of, or in connection with, railway; (e) all vehicles which are used on any road for the purposes of traffic or a railway and owned, hired or worked by a railway; and (f) all ferries, ships, boats and rafts which are used on any canal, river, lake or other navigable inland waters for the purposes of the traffic of a railway and owned, hired or worked by a railway administration, but does not include- (i) a tramway wholly within a municipal area; and (ii) lines of rails built in any exhibition ground, fair, park, or any other place solely for the purpose of recreation; 9. The word Railway as per the above definition means Railway or any portion thereof, but the same should be used for public carriage of passengers, goods and includes various properties as specified in Clauses (a) to (f) therein. The term "Railway", in the first part of the definition clause relies upon the word "Railway" as is understood in normal parlance, with a stipulation that it should be used for the purpose of transportation of public carriage of passengers or goods. The Supreme Court in the case of Shahadara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Company v. Municipal Board , had agreed with the contenti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atutes are at variance with each other. Two similar terms can have two different meanings under two enactments depending upon the context in which the said terms have been used. Therefore, it will not be proper to import the definition of the terms "Metro Railway", etc. used in 2002 Act into 1989 Act. 1989 Act is a separate enactment and it's clauses have to be interpreted as per the definition given to the said term in the said enactment. Recourse to 2002 enactment is not permissible to define "Railway Administration" under 1989 Act. It is also equally well settled that there can be two separate enactments dealing with the same subject matter and the question which one of the two enactments will prevail on a particular issue or question, may arise in a given case, but the said question is not relevant and material for the present controversy. Therefore, it is not possible to hold and accept the contention of the respondent corporation that the petitioner ceases to be "railway administration" within the meaning of Section 2 (32) of 1989 Act in view of definition clauses in 2002 enactment or as 2002 Act stands enforced. Moreover, the expression "Railway" is generic in nature and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dian Railways Act, 1890 was in force but subsequently, 1989 Act was enforced with the earlier enactment being repealed. Similarly, for the purpose of Section 2(2) of 1978 Act reference will have to be made to 1989, Act for defining all words and expressions, which have not been defined in 1978 Act. 15. Logically, it also follows that when Section 104 of the 2002 Act makes reference to 1978 Act, it also makes reference to Section 43 of 1978 Act and therefore to 1989 Act. Section 104 of 2002 Act reads as under: 104. Application of other Acts.- Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the Metro Railways (Construction of Works) Act, 1978 (33 of 1978). 16. Thus, the said Section states that provisions of 2002 Act are in addition and not in derogation of the 1978 Act. The provisions of 1978 Act continue to apply even after 2002 Act was enforced. By virtue of Section 43 of the 1978 Act the provisions of 1989 Act will continue to apply and will accordingly be applicable even after enactment of 2002 Act. It may also be noticed here that the term "Railway" for the purpose of 2002 Act has been defined in Section 2(P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xamined and gone into the question with reference to liability of third parties, other than the petitioner to pay property tax and other taxes. It is open to the respondent to examine agreements and transactions entered into between the petitioner and the third parties to verify and decide whether the said third parties are liable to pay tax. 20. Another aspect which requires consideration is whether and which type of properties qualify and can be regarded as "Railway" for the purpose of Section 2 (31) of the 1989 Act and whether certain properties belonging to the petitioner do not qualify and cannot be regarded as Railway properties and, therefore, are not entitled to exemption under Section 2 (32) read with Section 184 of the 1989 Act. This aspect has not been examined by the Assessor and Collector and requires detailed scrutiny and examination. Factual details will also have to be examined. 21. This question requires interpretation of Section 184 and the term "railway administration" and whether it includes properties not specified in Clauses (a) to (f) of Section 2 (31) of 1989 Act. It was pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that under Section 184 of the 1989, Act,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ales Tax Officer Kanpur (supra). In the said case, reference was made to definition of "Railway" in Section 3 (4) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 for the purpose of deciding whether exemption granted under Section 28A (8) of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act in favor of Railway Administration was applicable. The question that arose for consideration was whether city booking agencies were "Railways" for the purpose of Section 28A (8) of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act. It was held that for a city booking agency to fall within the expression "Railways", it must fall within one of the categories mentioned in Clauses (a) to (f) mentioned in Section 2 (31) of 1989 Act or Clauses (A) to (D) of Section 3 (4) of Indian Railways Act, 1890. It was also observed that this question could be decided if the relevant rules, orders and instructions including the contract agreement between the Railway and the city booking agencies were examined. The case was accordingly remanded back to the High Court to decide the question whether city booking agencies fall within the expression "Railways". 22. The result of the above discussion is that anything which falls within the definition of term "Railway" ....