Kerala High Court
Deputy Commissioner Of Sales Tax (Law), ... vs Co-Operative Sugars Ltd. on 1 July, 1991
Equivalent citations: [1993]88STC84(KER)
JUDGMENT K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.
1. The common question arising for consideration in all the three revision cases reads :
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the amount of transport charges is not includible in the purchase turnover of sugarcane ?"
So far as T.R.C. No. 164 of 1987 is concerned, there are two other questions and they are :
(1) "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the respondent-assessee is entitled to claim exemption on the turnover of rectified spirit, denatured spirit and methylated spirit under the provisions contained in the Notification S.R.O. No. 402/64 ?
(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the purchase turnover of firewood is not liable to tax under Section 5A(1)(c) (sic) of the Act at the hands of the assessee ?"
The second question above in the light of the ruling reported in Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Thomas Stephen & Co. Ltd. [1987] 66 STC 34 requires to be answered against the Revenue.
2. Now coming to the first question in T.R.C. No. 164 of 1987 the answer depends upon the construction of the Notification S.R.O. No. 402/64.
We shall read the notification :
"S.R.O. No. 402/64.--..........hereby make an exemption in respect of the tax payable under the said Act on the sale of the goods specified in the Schedule below at all points.
The Schedule.
1. Spirit other than liquor.
Explanation.--'Liquor' means and includes wine, brandy, champagne, sherry, rum, gin, whisky, beer, cider, coco-brandy, arrack and all other distilled or spirituous or fermented beverages brought into or produced or manufactured in the State.
2. Ganja.
3. Opium."
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that the expression "spirit" cannot be said to take in its fold rectified spirit, denatured spirit and methylated spirit and therefore the exemption claimed cannot be taken cognisance of. We are not impressed by this argument. The unambiguous language used in this notification makes it clear that spirit other than liquor is entitled to exemption. We should in this connection bear in mind the well-established principle that if the words of a statute are in themselves precise and unambiguous no more is necessary than to expound those words in their natural and ordinary sense, the words themselves in such cases best declaring the intention of the Legislature. The explanation incorporated in the notification, namely :
" 'Liquor' means and includes wine, brandy, champagne, sherry, rum, gin, whisky, beer, cider, coco-brandy, arrack and all other distilled or spirituous or fermented beverages brought into or produced or manufactured in the State."
makes it very clear that what is exempted is the spirit which is not meant for consumption like liquor.
4. Now we shall deal with the common question. The assessing authority no doubt has found that the transport charges paid by the assessee to the transport agency was payment made on behalf of the grower. The assessing authority accordingly held that the transport charges will form part of the purchase price. This finding was specifically under challenge before the appellate authorities. The appellate authorities, after considering the various aspects of the issue and taking into account the materials made available by the parties, have concurrently found that the transporting charges represent amounts paid by the appellant-society to the lorry owners directly and therefore the said charges need not be included in the turnover. This concurrent finding concludes the issue. Nonetheless, it has not specifically been challenged by the Revenue which has filed these revision petitions. We, therefore, are not inclined to entertain the question which may convey some sense only if the above finding is specifically challenged.
5. Under the circumstances, we answer the question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.
The T.R.Cs fail. Accordingly they are dismissed.