TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 662
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2004-2005 under A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the APGST Act, 1957") arising out of different assessment orders with respect to the same respondent on the same subject. Facts of the Case: 3. The respondent Pulp-N-Pack (P) Limited, Tadimalla is a trader in Pulp Moulded Egg Trays, (the Commodity in short) manufactured by a Small-Scale Industries (SSI) Units. The respondent was finally assessed by the Commercial Tax Officer (CTO) granting exemption on the sales turnover of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays from the levy of turnover tax pursuant to G.O. Ms. No. 1091 Revenue (CT-II) Department dated 31.10.1994, issued under Section 9 (1) read with Section 5A (1) (vi) of the APGST Act. The Deputy Commissioner (CT) in suo motu revision, vide separate orders dated 23.05.2007 and 24.05.2007 levied the turnover tax under Section 5-A, @ 10% holding that the respondent was liable to the turnover tax on the second sales of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays which fell under Item 19 of the First Schedule. The Appellate Tribunal allowed the respondent's four appeals vide separate orders dated 18.02.2008 restoring the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, holding that the respondent was entitled for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 does not say that such commodity sold by manufacturing unit alone is exempted. Submissions of the learned GP: 8. Sri T.C.D Shekar submitted that the exemption granted to Pulp Moulded Egg Trays in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 issued under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act is not a general exemption. He further submitted that in any case, such exemption is not available to the respondent as it is not a manufacturing SSI Unit of such commodity. He placed reliance in Anandi Roller Flour Mills Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, A.P. 2001(2) ALT 286 in support of his submissions. Submissions of the learned counsel for Respondent: 9. Sri S. Suri Babu, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the exemption granted vide G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 is a general exemption as it was issued under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act, 1957 and it does not contain any condition or restriction contemplated by Sub-Section (2) of Section 9. Consequently, it cannot be a conditional exemption. He further submitted that the exemption being general exemption under Section 9 (1), no tax under Section 5A (1)(vi) shall be payable on that part of the turnover whi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....57 reads as under: "5A. Levy of tax on turnover: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, tax shall be levied at the rate of [one paise on every rupee of turnover of a dealer, other than the dealers mentioned in sub-section (1-A)] [Substituted 'one paise in every rupee of turnover of a dealer' by Act No. 3 of 2002.] whose total turnover in a year exceeds rupees ten lakhs: Provided that the tax shall not be levied under this section on that part of the turnover of any dealer on which the dealer is liable to pay tax at the point of levy [specified in the First Schedule, except petrol, diesel oil, aviation turbine fuel, engine oils, lubricating oils, greases, brake fluids, furnaces oil and all kinds of motor vehicles,] [Substituted 'specified in the First Schedule' by Act No. 3 of 2002.] Second Schedule, Fifth Schedule and Seventh Schedule to the Act; Provided further that no tax under this section shall be payable on that part of turnover which relates to:- (i) sale or purchase of goods specified in Third Schedule; (ii) sale or purchase of goods specified in Fourth Schedule; (iii) sale or purcha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by Section 9 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, the State Government issued Notification-I in G.O. Ms. No. 1091 dated 31.10.1994 granting exemption from the tax payable under A.P.G.S.T Act on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by the Small-Scale Industries (SSI). The G.O. Ms. No. 1091 is reproduced as under: "In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section (1) of Section 9 of APGST Act, 1957 (Act IV of 1957, the Government of Andhra Pradesh hereby exempts from the tax payable under the said Act on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by the Small-Scale Industries Units (SSI)". 19. The G.O. Ms. No. 1091 thus grants exemption on the sale of the Pulp Moulded Egg Trays manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units. The Pulp Moulded Egg Trays which are manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units, only, call for exemption. If not manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units it would not be exempted. Consideration of Precedents on interpretation of taxing statute / Exemption provision: 20. In Ramnath and Company vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2021) 12 SCC 217, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that it remains tri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n exemption notification which is subject to strict interpretation, the benefit of such ambiguity cannot be claimed by the subject/assessee and it must be interpreted in favour of the Revenue. 66.3. The ratio in Sun Export case is not correct and all the decisions which took similar view as in Sun Export case stand overruled. 16.4. Obviously, the generalised, rather sweeping, proposition stated in Sun Export Corpn. [Sun Export Corpn. v. Collector of Customs, (1997) 6 SCC 564] as also in other cases that in the matters of taxation, when two views are possible, the one favourable to the assessee has to be preferred, stands specifically disapproved by the Constitution Bench in Dilip Kumar & Co. [Commr. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co., (2018) 9 SCC 1] It has been laid down by the Constitution Bench in no uncertain terms that exemption notification has to be interpreted strictly; the burden of proving its applicability is on the assessee; and in case of any ambiguity, the benefit thereof cannot be claimed by the subject/assessee, rather it would be interpreted in favour of the Revenue." 24. Thus, the law declared is that the exemption notification should be interpre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1989 SCC (Tax) 84] and Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd. [Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd., (1990) 4 SCC 256 : 1990 SCC (Tax) 422]] Thus, distinction can be made between the substantive requirements that require strict compliance, non-compliance of which would render the assessee ineligible to claim exemption, and the procedural or compliance provision which can be interpreted liberally [see SCC paras 64 to 65 in Dilip Kumar [Commr. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co., (2018) 9 SCC 1] ]. 14. Essar Steel [Essar Steel (India) Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 8 SCC 357] was a case relating to grant of exemption under Section 3(2)(a)(vii)(a) from payment of electricity duty under the 1958 Act. The Court relied on several decisions on interpretation of notification in the nature of exemption, to hold that the statutory conditions for grant of exemption can neither be tinkered with nor diluted. The exemption notification must be interpreted by their own wordings, and where the wordings of notification with regard to the construction is clear, it has to be given effect to. If on the wordings of the notification benefit is not available, then the court would not grant benefit by s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed". The expression "has been constructed" obviously cannot include within its sweep a building which is not fully constructed or in the process of construction. The opening words of clause (ii) also become important in this behalf, where it is stated that "the land occupied by any building". The land cannot be treated to be occupied by a building where it is still under construction. If the contention of Mr Jain is accepted, an assessee would become entitled to the benefit of the said clause, at that very moment, the commencement of construction even with construction the moment one brick is laid. It would be too far-fetched, in such a situation, to say that the land stands occupied by a building that has been constructed thereon. Even Mr Jain was candid in accepting that when the construction of building is still going on and is not completed, literally speaking, it cannot be said that the building "has been constructed". It is for this reason that he wanted us to give the benefit of this provision even in such cases by reading the expression to mean the same as "is being constructed". His submission was that the moment construction starts the urban land is put to "productive use....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the exemption notification one should go by the clear, unambiguous wordings thereof. 27. In the context of exemption notification there is no new room for intendment. Regard must be to the clear meaning of the words. Claim to exemption is governed wholly by the language of the notification, which means by plain terms of the exemption clause. An assessee cannot claim benefit of exemption, on the principle that in case of ambiguity a taxing statue must be construed in his favour. 28. In Giridhar G. Yadalam v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax (2015) 17 SCC 664, it was held that in a taxing statute it is the plain language of the provision that has to be preferred where language is plain and is capable of one definite meaning. Purposive interpretation can be given only when there is some ambiguity in the language of the statutory provision or it leads to absurd results. 29. In Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, New Mandi Yard, Alwar vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Alwar (2022) 5 SCC 62, the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated that the exemption notification should not be liberally construed and beneficiary must fall within the ambit of the exemption and fulfill the conditions t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2006 circular." 30. In Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata vs. Rupa & Co., Ltd (2004) 6 SCC 408, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the exemption notification has to be construed strictly but that does not mean that the object and purpose of the Notification is to be lost sight of and the wording used therein ignored. Where the wordings of the Notification are clear and unambiguous they have to be given effect to. Exemption cannot be denied by giving a construction not justified by the wordings of the Notification. Para 7 of Rupa & Co., Ltd (supra) reads as under: "7. Undoubtedly, the Board circular and letters relied upon support Mr. Ganguli. However, if the interpretation given by the Board and the Ministry is clearly erroneous then this Court cannot endorse that view. An exemption Notification has to be constrained strictly but that does not mean that the object and purpose of the Notification is to be lost sight of and the wording used therein ignored. Where the wordings of the Notification are clear and unambiguous they have to be given effect to. Exemption cannot be denied by giving a construction not justified by the wordings of the Notification" Consideration....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... products by the Roller Flour Mills within the State for a period of five years with effect from the date of publication of the notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette. The notification was issued under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act. This Court held that the State Government granted exemption to all the Roller Flour Mills on the wheat and wheat products within the State. The said exemption granted to a specified class of persons should be considered as general exemption, not as a restricted or conditional. The judgment in the case of Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) was referred and was distinguished on the ground that in Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) exemption was granted subject to the fulfillment of the conditions, but in G.O. Ms. No. 377 subject matter of Anandi Roller Flour Mills Ltd. (supra) any conditions or restrictions to be fulfilled by the Roller Flour Mills in order to get the benefit of exemption could not be found. 34. It was observed that the G.O. Ms. No. 377 intended to benefit a specified class of persons viz., Roller Flour Mills. There was no reference to any specified restriction or condition as in sub-section (2) of Section 9 more specifically under Clause (b) u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as considered as a notification granting general exemption. It was observed that the requirements in G.O. Ms. No. 604 viz., the seeds certified and truthfully labeled are not cumulative requirements and that any one of these categories would qualify for exemption and that the exemption granted under G.O. Ms. No. 604 was a general exemption and as such it qualified for exemption under sub-section (2A) of Section 8 of the Central Act. 38. In Sri Venkateswara Hybrid Seeds Co. (supra) G.O. Ms. No. 604, Rev. dated 09.04.1981 was for consideration and following Pinakini Seeds (supra), it was held that the same granted general exemption as was also previously held in Pinakini Seeds (supra). Consequently, the assessee was held entitled for exemption from tax on his turnover under the Central Sales Tax as well. 39. In M/s. Vinod Solvent Extracts Private Limited (supra) G.O. Ms. No. 930, dated 28.07.1977 issued under Section 9 (1) of APGST Act granting exemption on the purchase of tapioca powder was under consideration. It was held that the said exemption was a general exemption in respect of the specified class of goods falling squarely within the ambit of Section 9 (1) (i) in respect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evant factors. 43. Section 5 A(1)(vi) of APGST Act uses the expression "generally, under sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the said Act". The expression 'generally' has not been defined in the Act, 1957. It has also not been explained in the APGST Act, like under Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The expression 'generally', however, refers to Sub-Section (1) of Section 9 of the Act, 1957. Sub-Section (1) of Section 9, confers the power on the State Government to notify exemptions and reductions of tax or interest under the said Act on the sale or purchase (i) of any specified class of goods and also (ii) by any specified class or persons in regard to the whole or any part of their turnover. The exemption notification under Sub-Section (1), may extend to the whole or any specified areas of the State and under clause (b) of sub-section (2), it may be subject to such restriction and conditions as may be specified in the notification, including conditions as to the license and license fee. If a notification is issued under section 9 (1), without imposing any such restrictions and conditions as contemplated by Sub-Section (2), we are of the view that such notification grantin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... & (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 9 in their terms contemplate for grant of exemption in respect thereto. A notification issued under Section 9 (1) may either be referable to Clause (i) or (ii) or both but unless it is subject to the condition or restriction under sub-section (2) of Section 9 it would be granting an exemption generally for the purposes of Section 5A (1) (vi) of APGST Act. 46. The question whether G.O. Ms. No. 1091 is a notification granting general exemption under Section 9 (1) for the purpose of the State tax is be construed from its language for the purpose of the A.P.G.S.T Act. But that would not mean that it is a notification granting general exemption also for the purpose of the C.S.T Act. Under C.S.T Act the word 'generally' has been explained in Section 8(2A) of that Act, and for the G.O. Ms. No. 1091 to qualify for exemption to the assessee it will have to fulfill the requirements of Section 8(2A), which aspect would be considered shortly under Question 'C' as framed. Question 'B': 47. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the G.O. Ms. No. 1091 is applicable and the respondent was entitled for exemption which has rightly been grante....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion can only be applied in cases where the text of the enactment is susceptible to only one meaning. [Nathi Devi v. Radha Devi Gupta, (2005) 2 SCC 271, para 13.] Nevertheless, in a situation where there is ambiguity in the meaning of the text, the courts must also give due regard to the consequences of the interpretation taken. 21. It is the responsibility of the courts to interpret the text in a manner which eliminates any element of hardship, inconvenience, injustice, absurdity or anomaly. [G.P. Singh on Principles of Statutory Interpretation, 14th Edn., 2016, pp. 145-170.] This principle of statutory construction has been approved by this Court in Modern School v. Union of India [Modern School v. Union of India, (2004) 5 SCC 583, para 62 : 2 SCEC 577], by reiterating that a legislation must further its objectives and not create any confusion or friction in the system. If the ordinary meaning of the text of such law is non-conducive for the objects sought to be achieved, it must be interpreted accordingly to remedy such deficiency." 52. In Bajaj Auto Limited v. Union of India (2019) 19 SCC 801 the Hon'ble Apex Court held that one principle is that exemption notificati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 12 are as follows: "9. In the case of "expansion or modernization", the exemption shall be available, if there is an additional production as a result of such modernisation or expansion. In the present case, we are concerned with the case of "diversification". Therefore, the goods manufactured after diversification must be different goods from the goods manufactured before such diversification. As per the settled position of law, in case of an exemption notification/exemption provision, the same is required to be construed literally and the person claiming the exemption must satisfy all the conditions of exemption provision. 12. The words used in Section 4-A are very clear and unambiguous. As per the settled proposition of law and as observed hereinabove, the statute and more particularly, the exemption provisions are to be read as they are and to be construed literally and should be given a literal meaning. Giving the literal meaning to the exemption provision, namely, Section 4-A, it cannot be said that the appellant is entitled to the exemption as claimed." 54. Recently, in Checkmate Services Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (2023) 6 SCC 451....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....compliance might suffice in the case of a directory rule. 26. Whenever the statute prescribes that a particular Act is to be done in a particular manner and also lays down that failure to comply with the said requirement leads to severe consequences, such requirement would be mandatory. It is the cardinal rule of interpretation that where a statute provides that a particular thing should be done, it should be done in the manner prescribed and not in any other way. It is also settled rule of interpretation that where a statute is penal in character, it must be strictly construed and followed. Since the requirement, in the instant case, of obtaining prior permission is mandatory, therefore, non-compliance with the same must result in cancelling the concession made in favour of the grantee, the respondent herein." This was also reaffirmed in a number of judgments, such as CIT v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd. [CIT v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd., (2018) 2 SCC 158] 57. The Constitution Bench, in Commr. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. [Commr. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co., (2018) 9 SCC 1] endorsed as following : (SCC pp. 19 & 23-24, paras 24 & 34) "24. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion in clear words grants exemption on the sale of Pulp Moulded Egg Trays which are manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units. So the exemption is on the sale if the commodity is manufactured by Small-Scale industrial units. From the plain language of the notification it does not follow that the sale should also be by the Small-Scale industrial units alone, which has manufactured it. The expression 'by' refers to 'manufactured' and not the 'sale'. So, where the Pulp Moulded Egg Trays are manufactured by Small-Scale industrial units, their sale, may be by the same Small-Scale industrial units which has manufactured, or may be by some other Small-Scale Industrial Units dealer/assessee which may not have manufactured, would be entitled for exemption. Since the respondent herein is the Small-Scale industrial unit, we are considering the sale by SSI only and not making any observation with respect to the sale by any other dealer/assessee. So far as the respondent assessee is concerned the sale by it of the kind of the commodity exempted under G.O. Ms. No. 1091, would be entitled for exemption. 57. The submission advanced by the learned Government Pleader that the exemption is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x law of the appropriate State, notwithstanding that he, in fact, may not be so liable under that law. (2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1A) of section 6 or sub-section (1) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of this section, the tax payable under this Act by a dealer on his turnover in so far as the turnover or any part thereof relates to the sale of any goods, the sale or, as the case may be, the purchase of which is, under the sales tax law of the appropriate State, exempt from tax generally or subject to tax generally at a rate which is lower than four percent (whether called a tax or fee or by any other name), shall be nil or, as the case may be, shall be calculated at the lower rate. Explanation- For the purposes of this sub-section a sale or purchase of any goods shall not be deemed to be exempt from tax generally under the sales tax law of the appropriate State if under that law the sale or purchase of such goods is exempt only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions or the tax is levied on the sale or purchase of such goods at specified stages or otherwise than with reference to the turnover of the goods. 60. Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t go only by the label and the explanation must be read ordinarily to clear up any ambiguity in the main section and it cannot be construed to widen the ambit of the section. However, if on a true reading of an Explanation it appears to the Court in a given case that the effect of the Explanation is to widen the scope of the main section then effect must be given to the legislative intent. In all such cases, the Court has to find out the true intention of the legislature. 63. The Hon'ble Apex Court also referred to Doypack Systems (P) Ltd. v. Union of India (1988) 2 SCC 299 in which it was observed inter alia that the deeming provision generally is intended to enlarge the meaning of the particular word or to include matters which otherwise may not fall within the main provision. In Corporation Bank (supra) Explanation IV to Section 2 (1) (e) of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act 1957, which defined the word 'dealer' was for consideration. There was inbuilt expression "deeming provision" in the said Explanation. So, the Explanation IV also contained a deeming clause. The Hon'ble Apex Court held that the object of the Explanation IV containing such deeming clause was to expand the mea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lear and explicit, the legal fiction so created must also be given its full effect." 66. In the present case, Explanation to sub-section (2A) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act also contains a deeming provision. The deeming provision is inbuilt in such explanation and that the deeming provision is that "a sale or purchase of any case shall not be deemed to be exempt from tax generally.....". Here the deeming provision is a negative unlike in the case of Corporation Bank (supra), where a deeming provision was "shall be deemed to be". In the present case, the deeming provision in the explanation being in negative, applying the ratio as laid down in the case of Corporation Bank (supra), we hold that such deeming provision in the 'explanation', limits or restricts the general exemption. In other words, an exemption from tax which may be a general exemption for the purposes of the State Act may not be a general exemption for the purposes of Central Sales Tax Act if the exemption is only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions. Under Section 9 (1) of the APGST Act even the exemption can be for the specified goods and also for specified class of persons i.e., un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....both on raw materials and finished products." 69. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) observed that for attracting the exemption provided by the government order, it had to be established that (i) the goods, the sale or purchase of which is claimed to be exempt from tax, are manufactured by a large or medium scale industry and (ii) that the said goods are manufactured and sold within five years from the date the said industrial unit has gone into production. The Hon'ble Apex Court addressed the question as to whether an exemption of the nature granted under the Government Order No. 159 dated 26.03.1971 was an exemption available "only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions" within the meaning of the Explanation to Section 8 (2-A) or was it a case where the goods were exempt from the tax 'generally' within the meaning of Section 8 (2-A). 70. The Hon'ble Apex Court held that the idea behind sub-section (2-A) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act was to exempt the sale or purchase of the goods from the Central Sales Tax where the sale or purchase of such goods was exempt generally under the State sales tax law. It was held that due regard ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....um Cables Ltd. v. State of Haryana (1976) 4 SCC 27 and International Cotton Corpn. (P) Ltd. v. C.T.O. (1975) 3 SCC 585. Referring to the 1st case of Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. (supra), it observed that the question was whether the poles and cables sold to Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking were exempt from Central sales tax by virtue of the fact that Section 5 (2) (a) (iv) of the Punjab Sales Tax Act exempted sales to any undertaking supplying electrical energy to the public under a licence or sanction granted or deemed to have been granted under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 of goods for use by it in the generation or distribution of such energy from the State tax. Referring to the said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed and emphasized that general exemption means that "the goods should be totally exempt from tax before similar exemption from the levy of Central sales tax can become available. Where the exemption from taxation is conferred by conditions or in certain circumstances there is no exemption from tax generally". In applying the ratio of Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court held in Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) that answer to the question....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Act. But sub-section (2-A) requires specifically that such exemption must be a general exemption and not an exemption operative in specified circumstances or under specified conditions. Can it be said that the goods sold by the dealers in this case are exempt from tax generally under the State sales tax enactment? The answer can only be in the negative. Such goods are exempt from tax only when they are manufactured in a large or medium industrial unit within five years of its commencement of production and sold within the said period, i.e., in certain specified circumstances alone. The exemption is not a general one but a conditional one. The exemption under the Government Order No. 159 is not with reference to goods or a class or category of goods but with reference to the industrial unit producing them and their manufacture and sale within a particular period. For the purposes of the government order, the nature, class or category of goods is irrelevant; it may be any goods. It is concerned only with the industrial unit producing them and the period within which they are manufactured and sold. Can it be said in such a case that it is an instance where the sale is of goods, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urchased by the undertaking must be used for generation or distribution of electrical energy. If any of these circumstances are not satisfied, it was pointed out, the sale of such goods was not exempt from tax. It was emphasised that (SCC p. 31, para 15): "General exemption means that the goods should be totally exempt from tax before similar exemption from the levy of Central sales tax can become available. Where the exemption from taxation is conferred by conditions or in certain circumstances there is no exemption from tax generally". (emphasis added) In our respectful opinion, the ratio of this decision clearly concluded the question arising in Pine Chemicals [(1992) 2 SCC 683] against the assessees inasmuch as it was not a case where goods were "totally exempt from tax". It was a case where the exemption operated or was attracted only if it was established that such goods were manufactured in a large or medium industrial unit within five years of its going into production and were sold within that period. As pointed out hereinbefore, the exemption was not with reference to goods but with reference to the unit manufacturing the goods. 12. In ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mployed in Section 8(2-A). The sub-section does not say that wherever a particular sale or purchase of goods is exempt from tax under the State enactment, it would equally be exempt from tax under the Central enactment. It imposes a further and a very important requirement, viz., that the sale or purchase of goods, in respect of which exemption is claimed under the Central Act, should be exempt from tax generally under the State enactment. Not stopping with that, the sub-section proceeds to explain and define what do the words "exempt from tax generally under the sales tax law of the appropriate State" mean? In this view of the matter, acceptance of the contention urged by Shri Aggarwal would be a case of over-simplification and violative of the express language employed in the sub-section." 73. Applying the principle of law laid down in Pine Chemicals Ltd. (supra) we proceed to consider the G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 to find out if the said government order is granting general exemption within the meaning of Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act read with its explanation. If it is so, the assessee would be entitled for exemption under the Central Sales Tax Act as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he specified circumstances or under specified conditions in which or under which the exemption was available. It was held that it being so, the exemption granted by the government order under the State law was not a general exemption, but a conditional one and consequently, the exemption from tax under the State Act was not for Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Applying the same principle, we hold that the G.O. Ms. No. 1091, dated 31.10.1994 does not grant exemption from tax, to the goods i.e., pulp moulded egg trays manufactured by the Small-Scale industrial units, in general for the purposes of Section 8 (2A) of CST Act. In other words, the pulp moulded egg trays manufactured by all kinds of industries are not exempted. The exemption is only under the specified circumstances or under specified conditions on only those pulp moulded egg trays which are manufactured by Small-Scale industrial units. The exemption under Section 8 (2A) of the Central Act does not speak of an exemption for the dealer much less for the unit manufactured under Section 8 (2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act. It speaks sale or purchase of goods being exempted generally under the State Sales Tax enac....