Patna High Court
Shankar Bhai Dada Bhai Patel vs The State Of Bihar And Ors. on 25 January, 1978
Equivalent citations: AIR1979PAT23, 1978(26)BLJR414, AIR 1979 PATNA 23, 1978 BLJR 414 (1978) BLJ 636, (1978) BLJ 636
Author: Lalit Mohan Sharma
Bench: Lalit Mohan Sharma
ORDER
1. The petitioner, by this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has challenged the demand for market fee as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ application, payable under the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 (hereinafter to be called as the Act) on tobacco, after including in its value the amount of excise duty paid on the commodity.
2. The market fee is payable under Sub-section (1) of Section 27 which is in the following terms :
"27. Power to levy fees (1) The market committee shall levy and collect market fees on the agricultural produce bought or sold in the market area, at the rate of rupee one per Rs. 100/- worth of agricultural produce.
Explanation-- All notified agricultural produce leaving a market area, shall unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to have been bought or sold in such area.
Provided that, when any agricultural produce brought in any market area for the purpose of processing or export is not processed or exported therefrom as the case may be, or any such produce processed in the market area is not exported therefrom within twenty one days from the date of its arrival therein, it shall, until the contrary is proved, be presumed to have been bought or sold in the market area, and shall be liable for the levy of fees under this section as it it had been so bought or sold."
3. Mr. Kailash Roy appearing for the petitioner has contended that the term "worth" in the section does not mean the price or the market value of the commodity and does not include the excise duty paid thereupon. He has referred to the Dictionary edited by Sir James Murray for the meaning of the word. The term conveys different shades of meaning in accordance with the context in which it is used. When used in connection with say the forensic skill of a person it may refer to the quality of the person or the degree of his skill but when used with reference to commercial transactions it must be understood to refer to the market value, that is the price for which the particular commodity is sold. In the cited dictionary also, the first meaning given to the word is "pecuniary value" the "price". The other meanings mentioned in the Dictionary are clearly not applicable in the present context. As it appears from a reference to the section quoted above, fee has to be paid on the agricultural produce bought or sold in the market and therefore the aforesaid ordinary meaning has to be given to the word "worth". In MaclLquham v. Taylor (1895) 1 Ch 53 the expression "£ 1000 worth of shares" had to be construed. The defendant in the case had covenanted, by a deed to pay a sum of £ 1000 or transfer to the plaintiff £ 1000 worth of fully paid company shares. The value of the shares had considerably diminished when the dispute arose and the court of appeal held that the expression "£ 1000 worth of shares" meant shares of that value in the market and since the shares transferred had no market value the defendant was asked to pay the amount in cash, In the King v. The Hull Dock Co., (1824) 107 ER 825 al similar interpretation was given. We therefore, overrule the objection raised on behalf of the petitioner and hold that the word "worth" in Section 27 of the Act means the market value of the commodity in question.
4. The next point which has been canvassed is that the excise duty paid on the commodity is not included in its value. Ordinarily the market value of an article must include the entire amount which has been paid or incurred in procuring the same and unless there is a provision in the statute to limit this meaning, it cannot be restricted. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to give any reason for limiting the meaning of the word in the present case. He has, however, referred to Rule 82 (viii) as an illustration that actual market price is not always taken the basis of the levy. This provision does not to our mind, advance the petitioner's argument. The sub-rule governs the cases of fictional sales in a market and by providing for calculation of the worth of a commodity brought for the purpose of processing or export on the basis of the average market rate of the relevant day, it supports rather than negatives our view. Mr. Government pleader also relied upon the case of Dayabhai Gokul Bhai v. The State of Bihar (AIR 1959 Pat 389) for the proposition that excise duty must be deemed to be included in the price. In the present case the question is confined to the value of tobacco on which excise duty has already been paid and it is not necessary to consider or decide the question with reference to tobacco on which excise duty has to be paid in future. The market fee has to be paid on the transactions of sale and purchase in the market area and the amount for which the transaction takes place is always ascertainable and therefore there is no difficulty in interpreting the meaning of the section so far this aspect is concerned. Accordingly, we hold that the fee is payable on the entire amount (paid as the price of the commodity in question including the excise duty which has already been paid.
5. For the reasons stated above the application is dismissed but there will be no order as to costs.