Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Feno Plast Private Limited on 26 December, 1994
Equivalent citations: [1995]97STC316(AP)
Author: Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri
Bench: A.S. Bhate, S.S. Mohammed Quadri
JUDGMENT Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.
1. These two tax revision cases and the writ petition arise out of the same facts and raise common questions of fact and law, therefore they are heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.
2. The State is the petitioner in the tax revision cases and the assessee is the respondent in them. The writ petition is filed by the assessee-respondent.
3. By a common order dated June 12, 1989, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, allowed three tax appeals. Here we are concerned with two tax appeals. T.R.C. No. 284 of 1990 is filed against the order in Tax Appeal No. 197 of 1989 which relates to the assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short "the CST Act"), for the assessment year 1987-88 and T.R.C. No. 320 of 1990 is filed against the order in T.A. No. 219 of 1989 which relates to the assessment of the tax for the year 1987-88 under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short "the APGST Act").
4. To appreciate the contentions urged in these cases, it would be useful to refer to the relevant facts. The assessee is a manufacturer of rexine cloth (coated cotton fabrics). It claimed exemption from the sales tax on the turnover relating to the sales of rexine cloth on the ground that the rexine cloth falls within the meaning of the expression "cotton fabrics" contained in item No. 5 of the Fourth Schedule appended to the APGST Act. The assessing authority upheld the claim of the assessee. But in exercise of the revisional powers, the Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes) withdrew the exemption and assessed the turnover to sales tax. The assessee carried the matter in appeal, against the orders of the Deputy Commissioner, both under the CST Act and APGST Act, before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. The Tribunal, agreeing with the view of the assessing authority that the assessee was entitled to the exemption, allowed the appeals by a common order dated June 12, 1989. Hence, these two revisions are preferred by the State.
5. The State of Andhra Pradesh amended the First Schedule of the APGST Act and inserted entry No. 174 initially by G.O.Ms. No. 375, dated April 25, 1987, with effect from May 1, 1987, subsequently by Act 25 of 1988. Under the said entry, P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth, tarpaulin and rexine cloth are made taxable at the point of first sale in the State at the rate of 9 paise in the rupee. Challenging the constitutional validity of entry 174 in the First Schedule to the APGST Act, the assessee filed the writ petition praying for a writ of amandamus praying for a declaration that the said entry is ultra vires article 286(3) of the Constitution of India and section 15(a) of the CST Act and for a consequential direction that the rexine cloth fails within the meaning of "cotton fabrics" and is exempt from the levy of sales tax both under the CST Act as well as APGST Act.
6. Mr. S. R. Ashok, the learned counsel appearing for the assessee, challenges the constitutional validity of entry 174 in the First Schedule to the APGST Act. He urges that section 15 of the CST Act authorises the imposition of the tax on the sale or purchase of declared goods subject to the restrictions contained in clauses (a) to (d); clause (a) of section 15 stipulates that the tax payable under the APGST Act in respect of any sale or purchase of declared goods inside the State shall not exceed four per cent of the sale or purchase price thereof and such tax shall not be levied at more than one stage and that the State Act should be in conformity with the CST Act; section 6 of the APGST Act provides that sale or purchase of declared goods by a dealer shall be liable to tax at the rate and only at the point of sale or purchase specified against each in the Third Schedule of the APGST Act; as rexine cloth is not included in the Third Schedule but is included in entry 174 of the First Schedule, the said entry is ultra vires section 15(a) of the CST Act as well as section 6 of the APGST Act. He further contends that section 8 of the APGST Act exempts from tax the goods included in the Fourth Schedule to the said Act and entry 5 of the said Fourth Schedule includes "cotton fabrics" as one of the exempted goods, which has been interpreted to include rexine cloth by the different High Courts as well as by the Supreme Court; further by inserting entry 174 in the First Schedule the State cannot tax rexine and thus do away with the scheme which was based on the understanding between the State Governments and the Central Government-under the said scheme Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (for short "the Additional Duties of Excise Act") was enacted by the Parliament and each State is given a share in the income derived from the additional duty of excise, as prescribed, provided the State does not levy sales tax on the goods which have suffered additional duty of excise. Having thus developed his argument, he adds that unless the State gives up its share in the income under the Additional Duties of Excise Act, it cannot tax the declared goods and as the assessee has made specific allegations in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the State has received its share in the income derived from additional duty of excise, so it cannot tax the said declared goods, which have not been denied by the State and as such, the State cannot be permitted to receive the income under the said Additional Duties of Excise Act as well as levy sales tax on those goods.
7. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes supports the impugned entry 174 on the ground that the State Legislature has legislative competence under the Constitution to levy sales tax on the said declared goods and any understanding reached between the State Government and the Central Government would not preclude the State Legislature from discharging its constitutional functions of enacting laws or amending the Schedules and contends that the Explanation appended to the Fourth Schedule states that the expression "cotton fabrics" shall have the same meaning assigned to it in the Additional Duties of Excise Act and as the relevant definition has been repealed, the assessee cannot rely on those repealed definitions or the provisions enacted subsequently for the purpose of searching the meaning of the said expression; in any event, submits the learned Government Pleader, the exemption, if any contained in the Fourth Schedule would be deemed to have been impliedly withdrawn by insertion of entry 174 in the First Schedule; he argues that the order under revision deserves to be set aside and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
8. On the above contentions, the following questions arise for determination :
(1) Whether insertion of entry 174 in the First Schedule to the APGST Act is constitutionally valid and/or what is its effect ?; and (2) Whether the turnover of the sale of rexine cloth by the assessee is exigible to tax under the CST Act as well as the APGST Act ?
9. As these two questions are connected, we propose to deal with them together. Here it will be useful to begin the discussion by referring to such provisions of the CST Act and the APGST Act, which are relevant for this purpose.
10. Section 6 of the CST Act is a charging section. It provides that with effect from the appointed date, every dealer shall be liable to pay tax under that Act on all sales of goods effected by him in the course of inter-State trade or commerce during any year; however, the sale of electrical energy is excluded from the purview of the section. The provisions of this section are subject to the other provisions of the CST Act.
11. Section 8 of the CST Act prescribes the rate of tax on sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. Section 8(2-A) of the Act provides that the tax payable under the CST Act by a dealer on his turnover, in so far as it or any part of it relates to the sale of any goods, shall be nil if the sale or, as the case may be, the purchase of which is, under the sales tax law of any State, exempt from the tax generally or shall be calculated at the lower rate if the sale or the purchase under the State law of any State is subject to tax generally at the rate which is lower than four per cent.
12. Section 14 of the CST Act enumerates certain goods of special importance in inter-State trade or commerce, called declared goods. Section 15 mandates that every sales tax law of the State shall be subject to the following restrictions in regard to the imposition of tax on sale or purchase of the declared goods. The restrictions and conditions, relevant for our purpose are :
(1) the tax payable under the State law in respect of any sale or purchase of the declared goods inside the State shall not exceed four per cent; and (2) no tax shall be levied on the sale or purchase of the declared goods at more than one stage.
13. There is no provision in the CST Act which exempts the turnover of the sale or purchase of declared goods.
14. Now we shall refer to the relevant provisions of the APGST Act. Section 5 of the said Act, as it stood during the assessment year 1987-88, was in the following terms :
"5. Levy of tax on sales or purchases of goods. - (1) Every dealer (other than a casual trader and an agent of a non-resident dealer) whose total turnover for a year is not less than Rs. 2,00,000 and every agent of a non-resident dealer, whatever be his turnover for the year, shall pay a tax for each year, at the rate of five paise on every rupee of his turnover. Every casual trader shall pay a tax at the rate of five paise on every rupee of his turnover :
Provided that a dealer in jaggery shall pay a tax at the rate of two paise on every rupee up to the 31st March, 1966 and at the rate of three paise on every rupee on and from the 1st April, 1966, of his turnover irrespective of the quantum of turnover.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the tax under this Act shall be levied -
(a) in the case of the goods mentioned in the First Schedule at the rates and only at the point of the sale specified as applicable thereto effected in the State by the dealer selling them, on his turnover of sales in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover;
(b) in the case of the goods mentioned in the Second Schedule at the rates and only at the point of the purchase specified as applicable thereto, effected in the State by the dealers purchasing them, on his turnover of purchase in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover
(c) in the case of the goods mentioned in the Fifth Schedule, at the rates and at the points specified as applicable thereto, on the turnover of the dealer in each year relating to such goods irrespective of the quantum of turnover;
(3) For the purpose of this section and the other provisions of this Act, the turnover on which a dealer shall be liable to pay tax shall be determined after making such deductions from his total turnover, and in such manner as may be prescribed.
(4) The taxes under this section shall be assessed, levied and collected in such manner, as may be prescribed :
Provided that -
(i) in respect of the same transaction, the buyer or the seller but not both, as determined by such rules as may be prescribed, shall be taxed;
(ii) where a dealer has been taxed in respect of the purchase of any goods, in accordance with the rules referred to in clause (i) of this proviso, he shall not be taxed again in respect of any sale of such goods effected by him."
15. By Act 4 of 1989, sub-sections (1) and (2) were substituted by section 5(1) which is in force. There were then six Schedules to the Act. Schedules I, II, V and VI are dealt with in clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (2). Schedule III enumerates the declared goods on which single point tax only is leviable under section 6.
16. It is also relevant to note here section 6 of the APGST Act which deals with the declared goods. This section opens with a non obstinate clause and provides that notwithstanding anything contained in section 5, the sales or purchases of declared goods by a dealer shall be liable to tax at the rate and only at the point of sale or purchase specified against each in the Third Schedule on his turnover of such sales or purchases for each year irrespective of the quantum of turnover in such goods. The rate of tax mentioned in Schedule III does not exceed 4 per cent of the turnover. The assessment and the collection of the tax shall be made in the manner prescribed which means prescribed by the Rules. The proviso to this section enacts that where any of the declared goods which suffered tax under the APGST Act, are sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce and the turnover of that sale or purchase had been subjected to tax under the CST Act, then in respect of the turnover which relates to the sale of such goods in the course of the inter-State trade or commerce, the tax levied under the APGST Act will have to be reimbursed in the prescribed manner. Schedule IV specifies the goods which are exempted under section 8 of the Act. Section 8 of the APGST Act says that a dealer who deals in the goods specified in the Fourth Schedule shall be exempt from tax under the State Act in respect of such goods, subject to such restrictions or conditions as may be prescribed.
17. A combined reading of the above provisions leads us to the conclusion that in respect of goods mentioned in the First Schedule, every dealer shall pay the tax under the State Act on every rupee of his turnover of sales or purchases of goods in each year at the rates of tax and at the points of levy specified in the Schedule stated above. The goods in the Third Schedule are declared goods and levy of State sales tax on them can only be in accordance with the terms of section 6 of the Act which together with Schedule III has been enacted to fall in line with clause (a) of section 15 of the CST Act. With regard to the goods enumerated in the Fourth Schedule, no sales tax can be levied under the State Act.
18. Now we shall revert to the goods in dispute, viz., "cotton fabrics" which are included in item 5 of the Fourth Schedule which reads as follows :
"Fourth Schedule Goods exempted from tax under section 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sl. No. Description of goods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Cotton fabrics, man-made fabrics and woollen fabrics Explanation. - The expressions in items 5, 6 and 7 shall have the same meanings assigned to them in the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (Central Act 58 of 1957)."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. It may not be out of place to point out here that item 5 had undergone several changes but that will not be material for the present discussion. Here it would be suffice to state that the Explanation is added by Act 9 of 1970 with effect from June 1, 1970. The said Explanation says that the expressions in item Nos. 5, 6 and 7 shall have the same meanings assigned to them in the Additional Duties of Excise Act. Section 2(c) of the said Act defines "sugar", "tobacco", "cotton fabrics", "silk fabrics", "woollen fabrics" and "rayon or artificial silk fabrics" in terms of the meanings respectively assigned to them in item Nos. 1, 4, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Item 19 of the First Schedule to the said Act deals with "cotton fabrics" and reads as follows :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item Description of goods Rate of duty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"19. Cotton fabrics -
'Cotton fabrics' means all varieties of fabrics manufactured either wholly or partly from cotton and include dhoties, sarees, chaddars, bed-sheets, bed-spreads, counter-panes and table-cloths, but do not include any such fabric -
(a) if it contains 40 per cent or more by weight of wool,
(b) if it contains 40 per cent or more by weight of silk,
(c) if it contains 60 per cent or more by weight of rayon or artificial silk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Item 19, containing the definition of "cotton fabrics" in the Central Excises and Salt Act, fell for consideration of the Supreme Court in State of Kerala v. Attesee (Agro Industrial Trading Corporation) (19891 72 STC 1.. It was held therein that the definition of "cotton fabrics" takes in its fold P.V.C. cloth. So also in Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad v. Fenoplast (P) Ltd. the Supreme Court laid down that rexine cloth falls within the meaning of the expression "cotton fabrics".
21. Here, we may note that section 2(c) of the Additional Duties of Excise Act was omitted by the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Amendment Act, 1985 (Act No. 7 of 1986) with effect from February 28, 1986. Section 4 of the said Amendment Act enacts that in the principal Act for the First Schedule, the Schedule appended to the Act 7 of 1986 shall be substituted. From the above narration, it is clear that in the relevant assessment year 1987-88, item 19 of the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act was not on the statute book. The scheme under the Additional Duties of Excise Act was changed and instead of defining various expressions, goods are classified according to their descriptions in the beads and sub-heading and the rates of additional duties are prescribed. "Cotton fabrics" are dealt with in sub-heading 5.205.00 heading 52.05.
22. The contention of the learned Government Pleader is that the Explanation to Schedule IV is not amended to define the expression "cotton fabrics" after section 2(c) was omitted from the Additional Duties of Excise Act; in the relevant assessment year there was no definition of "cotton fabrics" so the meaning of that expression shall be taken as commonly understood and coated cotton cloth like P.V.C. cloth or rexine cannot be brought within its meaning in common parlance. The learned counsel for the assessee argues that the definitions in the Explanation were incorporated by referential legislation and that all the changes made in the Additional Duties of Excise Act have to be looked into to ascertain the meaning of the, expression "cotton fabrics"; he contends that what was earlier defined in the Central Excises and Salt Act is now classified in headings and sub-headings under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and from there the meaning of the expression has to be ascertained.
23. It would be relevant to note here that "cotton fabrics" as defined in item 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act was included in clause (ii-a) of section 14 of the CST Act among the declared goods but that definition ceased to be applicable with effect from February 28, 1986 and was not in force in the relevant assessment year 1987-88. That clause was substituted by the following clause in section 14 by Act 26 of 1988 with effect from May 13, 1988.
"(ii-a) Cotton fabrics covered under heading Nos. 52.05, 52.06, 52.07, 52.08, 52.09, 52.10, 52.11, 52.12, 58.01, 58.02, 58.03, 58.04, 58.05, 59.01, 59.03, 59.05, 59.06 and 60.01 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986)."
24. Now the expression "cotton fabrics" in section 14 of the CST Act covers goods mentioned under various headings of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which include rexine. For purposes of both the State Act as well as the Central Act, in the assessment year 1987-88, the definition of "cotton fabrics" as contained in item 19 of the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act would not apply because with effect from February 5, 1986, before the relevant assessment year, the Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act was replaced by the Schedule appended to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
25. In view of changes in the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 and the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, referred to above, how should the expression "cotton fabrics" be understood ? For answering this question it will be useful to refer to the following decisions. In State of Kerala v. Attesee (Agro Industrial Trading Corporation) which arose under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, the scope of exemptions available to the "cotton fabrics" under item 7 of the Third Schedule read with section 9 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act in regard to the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73 fell for consideration of the Supreme Court. The Kerala General Sales Tax Act was passed in 1963. In the said Act the expression "cotton fabrics" was defined as contained in item 19 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. That definition was amended by Finance Act, 1969. At the time of passing the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, the definition of "cotton fabrics" as contained in the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, did not take in its fold P.V.C. cloth though the definition of that expression as amended by the Finance Act, 1969, was wide enough to include the P.V.C. cloth. On these facts and after making a reference to the principles of interpretation of an enactment and the relevant decisions, the Supreme Court observed as follows :
"........ It is sufficient to say that they (decisions referred to by the Supreme Court) draw a distinction between referential legislation which merely contains a 'reference to, or citation of a provision of another statute and a piece of referential legislation which incorporates within itself a provision of another statute. In the former case, the provision of the second statute along with all its amendments and variations from time to time, should be read into the first statute."
26. With regard to the latter case (where provisions of earlier statute are incorporated in the subsequent legislation), their Lordships reiterated the principles enunciated in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Narasimhan , it was held where a subsequent Act incorporates the provisions of a previous Act, the borrowed provisions become an integral and independent part of the subsequent Act and are totally unaffected by any repeal or amendment in the previous Act. This principle, however, will not apply in the following cases, viz. -
(a) where the subsequent Act and the previous Act are supplemental to each other;
(b) where the two Acts are in pari materia;
(c) where the amendment in the previous Act, if not imported into the subsequent Act, also would render the subsequent Act wholly unworkable and ineffectual; and
(d) where the amendment of the previous Act, either expressly or by necessary intendment, applies the said provisions to the subsequent Act."
27. On the facts of that case, their Lordships approved the conclusion reached by the High Court of Kerala that unless the extended definition of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, is imported into the Sales Tax Act, the latter Act would be unworkable and ineffectual.
28. Now reverting to the facts of our case, it has already been pointed out that both the APGST Act as well as the CST Act made a reference to the provisions of the Additional Duties of Excise Act which in turn referred to the definition of the expressions contained in the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Therefore, the provisions of the said two Acts have to be imported for understanding the meaning of "cotton fabrics" for purposes of the APGST Act as well as the CST Act inasmuch as the legislations here are referential legislations in the former sense. That being the position, having regard to the interpretation of the expression "cotton fabrics", discussed above, rexine falls within its meaning and as such we would have held that rexine is exempt from sales tax under the APGST Act, had entry 174 not been inserted in the First Schedule to the APGST Act. It is, therefore, necessary to notice here entry 174 in the First Schedule to the APGST Act. By virtue of the said entry, P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth, tarpaulin and rexine have become taxable under section 5 of the APGST Act.
29. However, Mr. S. R. Ashok submits that this development is inconsequential as section 8 would prevail over section 5 of the APGST Act and, therefore, rexine will have to be treated as falling under exempted goods. The learned Government Pleader defends the action of the authorities in taxing rexine and submits that even if there was any exemption in respect of rexine, it stood withdrawn with effect from the date of insertion of entry 174 in the First Schedule to the APGST Act. It is true that normally where the Legislature includes in Schedule I goods which were until then exempted it would be deemed that the exemption has been withdrawn in respect of those items, but on the facts of this case, we shall now examine whether this proposition holds good in respect of declared goods. Though the Legislature, by inserting entry 174, has declared its intention to tax rexine which falls within the meaning of "cotton fabrics" which is included in entry 5 of the Fourth Schedule, yet it has not deleted the same from the Fourth Schedule. Further there is another important factor which has to be taken note of and without which consideration of the issue in these cases will be incomplete and that is the fact the petitioner-assessee challenged legality and constitutional validity of Act 25 of 1988 by which entry 174 has been inserted in the First Schedule to the APGST Act, on the ground that as rexine falls within the meaning of "cotton fabrics" and is thus one of the items of declared goods, the power of the State Legislature to impose the tax is restricted by the provisions of article 286 of the Constitution as well as section 15 of the CST Act and also section 6 of the APGST Act. We have already made a reference to these provisions above. A combined reading of those provisions leads us to the conclusion that in regard to the declared goods the power of the State Legislature to authorise imposition of sales tax on the turnover of sales or purchases of declared goods is subject to such restrictions and conditions in regard to the system of levy, rates of tax and other incidents of tax as specified in section 15 of the CST Act and section 6 of the APGST Act. It has already been noticed that under section 15(a) of the CST Act the tax on sales/purchases of declared goods inside the State shall not exceed four per cent of the turnover of the sale or purchase price thereof and such tax shall not be levied at more than one stage. Clause (b) of section 15 provides that where sales tax has been levied in respect of the sales or purchases inside the State on the turnover of the sales or purchases of the declared goods and such goods are sold in the course of the inter-State trade or commerce and thus the goods are subjected to double taxation, both under the CST Act as well as APGST Act, the tax paid under the APGST Act will have to be reimbursed to the assessee. To the same effect is section 6 of the APGST Act. It enjoins that the turnover of the sales or purchases of the declared goods by a dealer shall he liable to tax at the rate and only at the point of sale or purchase specified against each in the Third Schedule on his turnover of such sales or purchases for each year. This is so irrespective of the quantum of turnover of the dealer in such goods if they are enumerated as declared goods in section 14 of the CST Act. Under the APOST Act tax can be assessed, levied and collected in respect of declared goods only in the manner provided in the Third Schedule to the APGST Act. But in the instant case P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth, tarpaulin and rexine are not included in the Third Schedule. What would then be the position ? It has already been held that rexine falls within the meaning of the expression "cotton fabrics" under section 14(ii-a) of the CST Act and is thus one of the items included in the declared goods, so levy, assessment and collection of sales tax on rexine, P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth and tarpaulin can only be subject to limitations contained in section 15 of the CST Act. Therefore, it follows that notwithstanding the fact that the State Legislature inserted rexine, P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth and tarpaulin under item 174 of the First Schedule, sales tax on them can be levied only subject to limitation imposed under section 15 of the CST Act, that is at the rate not exceeding 4 per cent of the turnover of sales or purchases of rexine and only at one stage. It may be pointed out here that it has already been held above that under the CST Act as section 14(ii-a) stood till February 28, 1986, i.e., till the assessment year 1985-86 the expression "cotton fabrics" would include "rexine, P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth and tarpaulin". With effect from May 13, 1988, the date on which present clause (ii-a) of section 14 was substituted, admittedly the said clause takes in its fold rexine, P.V.C. cloth, tarpaulin and waterproof cloth. Having regard to the various provisions of the CST Act, we are of the view that the position with reference to the relevant assessment year 1987-88, could not be different from what it was in the previous year or it is in the subsequent years.
30. In so far as the position under the APGST Act is concerned, we may mention that having regard to amendments in the Central Excises and Salt Act, the Additional Duties of Excise Act and the Central Excise Tariff Act, referred to above, the meaning of the expression "cotton fabrics" in item 5 of Schedule IV had become obscure. However, having considered the relevant provisions of the said Acts, we have opined that the said expression includes "rexine, P.V.C. cloth, waterproof cloth and tarpaulin". We wish to observe that though the State Legislature amended the entry 5 in the Fourth Schedule often it is strange that the Explanation to that Schedule was not touched. After section 2(c) of the Additional Duties of Excise Act was deleted and Schedule I of the Central Excises and Salt Act was replaced by the Schedule appended to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, the Explanation requires necessary amendments to make the definition of terms and the expressions used in items 5, 6 and 7 explicit, meaningful and intelligible. We hope that the Legislature would bestow its attention to this aspect.
31. In our considered view the effect of inclusion of rexine in entry 174 of the First Schedule to the APGST Act cannot have the effect of taxing the turnover of the sales or purchases of rexine at the rate mentioned in Schedule I in view of the provisions of section 6 of the APGST Act read with section 15 of the CST Act, as pointed out above, and thus that entry has to be read down to authorise exigibility of sales tax on the turnover of declared goods including rexine subject to the provisions of section 6 of the APGST Act read with section 15 of the CST Act, namely, that sales tax cannot exceed 4 per cent of the turnover and that it shall not be levied at more than one stage. In this view of the matter it may not be necessary to strike down the said entry.
32. For the aforementioned reasons, question No. 2 is answered accordingly. Consequently the order under revision is modified holding the contention of the State that rexine is taxable under entry 174 of Schedule I to the APGST Act at the rate specified therein as untenable and further holding that equally untenable is the contention of the assessee that as rexine falls within the meaning of "cotton fabrics" in item 5 of Schedule IV, so the turnover of sales of rexine is exempt. Subject to the aforesaid modification the T.R.Cs. are liable to be dismissed.
33. In the result, the writ petition is allowed as indicated above and subject to modification of the order of the Tribunal under revision the tax revision cases are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
34. Writ petition allowed and T.R.Cs. dismissed.