TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 508
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of facts accompanying the Reference. (See pages 10 to 13). Accordingly, we do not reproduce those facts and circumstances in detail in this judgment and order. 4. The Assessee is engaged in the manufacture and sale of juices, instant soft drinks, compounds, powders, essences, etc., and is duly registered under the provisions of the said Act. The Assessee also manufactures various processed food items such as orange juice, tomato juice, mixed fruit jam, pineapple juice, mango juice, pineapple tidbits, tomato purée, pineapple slices, sweetcorn, etc. 5. The record shows that the Asseessee had been granted exemption under the 1979 Scheme of Incentives in relation to the payment of sales tax for the manufacture of certain products. However, in the assessment for the period 1991-1992, exemption benefits were disallowed in the context of items like tomato juice, mixed fruit jam, pineapple slices, sweet corns, etc., because these products were not explicitly mentioned in the eligibility certificate as the class of goods/products manufactured by the unit eligible for exemption benefits. In the above regard, a dispute arose whether the goods like pineapple slices, pineapple tidb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied but a ripened coconut with or without husk) is a 'fresh fruit' or a 'vegetable' to earn exemption from the levy of sales tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of P.A. Thillai Chidambara Nadar Vs. Addl. Appellate Asstt. Commissioner, Madurai and another (1985) 4 SCC 30 made the following observations at paragraphs 3 & 4 : "3. The canon of construction to be invoked in these types of statutes has been repeatedly enunciated in several decisions of this Court but it is not necessary to refer to all of them. In Indo international Industries v. CST, (1981) 3 SCR 294, this court ruled thus: (SCC p. 530, para 4) It is well-settled that in interpreting items in statutes like the Excise Tax Acts or Sales Tax Acts, whose primary object is to raise revenue and for which purpose they classify diverse products, articles and substances resort should be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of the terms or expressions used but to their popular meaning, that is to say, the meaning attached to them by those dealing in them. If any term or expression has been defined in the enactment then it must b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... excluded from the exemption thereby making the sale thereof liable to tax. 13. In the concurring opinion, it was reiterated that the principles to be adopted in deciding the question whether the ripened coconut with or without husk can be considered to be a vegetable i.e. in interpreting items in statutes whose primary object is to raise revenue and for which purpose they classify diverse products, articles and substances, resort should be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of the terms or expressions used, but to their popular meaning, that is to say, the meaning attached to them by those dealing in them. The Court noted that the expressions 'fresh fruit' or 'vegetable' have not been defined in the Act. Therefore, by applying the popular meaning test for the common parlance test, it was held that a ripened coconut could not be classified as either 'fresh fruit' or 'vegetable'. 14. The Tribunal in this case has relied upon Pio Food Packers (supra). Here, the issue involved was whether the pineapple fruit, which is processed into pineapple slices for being sold in sealed cans, there is no consumption of the original pineapple foods for 'manufacture' within the me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eholder when asked to bring home some 'fresh fruit' from the market, would, bring home pineapple slices or a fruit cocktail preserved in sugar syrup canned and sealed in vacuum containers? If the answer is in the negative, as, by applying the common parlance test, we think it should be, then the view taken by the Tribunal based upon failing to appreciate certain observations in Pio Food Packers (supra) would warrant interference. 19. We were also shown the decision in Sterling Foods Vs. The State of Karnataka and another [1986] 3 SCR 367, where the issue involved was whether shrimps, prawns and lobsters subjected to processing like cutting of heads and tails, peeling, deveining, cleaning and freezing cease to be the same commodity and become a different commodity for the purposes of section 5(3) of Central Sales Tax, 1956. In other words, can they still go under the description of shrimps, prawns and lobsters or in other words, when we use the words 'shrimps, prawns and lobsters', do they mean only raw shrimps, prawns and lobsters as caught from the sea, or do they also include processed and frozen shrimps, prawns and lobsters? 20. Again, the issue in Sterling Foods (supra) w....