TMI Blog1991 (12) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s may be put thus: Whether the "total turnover" of a dealer referred to in the notifications means, as the assessees contend, only the turnover in handmade washing soaps or, as the Revenue contends, the total turnover of the dealer in all goods in which he deals including handmade washing soaps? The authorities below having come to a conclusion in favour of the Revenue, the assessees filed the writ petitions. The learned single Judge held that the contention of the assessees was correct and, accordingly, set aside the notices issued to the assessees by the Revenue. Hence, these appeals. Our attention was drawn by Mr. H.L. Dattu, learned High Court Government Advocate, appearing for the Revenue, to the provisions of section 2(1)(u-2) of the Act which defines "total turnover". Thereunder "total turnover" means "the aggregate turnover in all goods of a dealer at all places of business in the State, whether or not the whole or any portion of such turnover is liable to tax, including the turnover of purchase or sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce or in the course of export of the goods out of the territory of India or in the course of import of the goods into the ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... halya Narayanan v. Dadajee Dhackjee Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (1980) ELT 102, where the principle set out in Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 12th edition, page 228, was approved. Put briefly, Maxwell said that where the language of a statute, in its ordinary meaning and grammatical construction, led to a manifest contradiction of the apparent purpose of the enactment or to some inconvenience or absurdity which could hardly have been intended, a construction could be put upon it which modified the meaning of the words and even the structure of the sentence. Counsel for the assessees also relied upon the judgment in Nyadar Singh v. Union of India [1988] 3 JT 448. The Supreme Court observed that the meaning to be given to statutory language depended on the evaluation of a number of interpretative criteria. Shorn of the context, words by themselves were "slippery customers". The Supreme Court also said that it was true that statutory language should be given its most obvious meaning, "to accord with how a man in the street might answer the problems posed by the words", the statute had to be taken as one found it. Considerations relevant to interpretation were not whether a differently ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion notification issued under the Bombay Sales Tax Act. The notification prescribed conditions for the availability of the exemption. The second condition used the expression "turnover of sales". The Division Bench observed that the expression "turnover of sales" would normally be interpreted as "total turnover of sales" or the "turnover of all sales" in view of the definition given to that expression in the Bombay Act. The question, however, was whether the context in which the expression was used required that a more limited meaning should be given to it. The Division Bench examined the notification in detail. It quoted the opening part thereof and found that the classes of sales or purchases referred to therein had to be sales or purchases which would have been liable to tax under the Bombay Act but for the exemption granted to them. The sales referred to, therefore, were only such sales which would not have been exempted from the payment of tax under the Bombay Act but for the exemption granted by the notification. The condition referred to such classes of sales, so that it referred only to the turnover of taxable sales. The Division Bench also drew support from the fact that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a dealer carries on business only in the goods specified in Schedule Ill and his turnover exceeds Rs. 50,000, the concession is not available. (ii) If, in the case mentioned above, the turnover does not exceed Rs. 50,000, the concession is available in respect of the entire turnover. (iii) If the dealer carries on business in the goods specified in Schedule III and also in other goods and his total turnover exceeds Rs. 50,000, the concession is not available even though the turnover in respect of the specified goods may be below Rs. 50,000. (iv) If, in the above case, the total turnover does not exceed Rs. 50,000, the concession is available but it is limited to the turnover in respect of the specified goods. Since the concession is not available except as regards the turnover in respect of the specified goods, the consequences are clearly anomalous. In certain cases, it may be claimed up to the limit of Rs. 50,000. In other cases, it cannot be had even if the turnover in respect of the specified goods does not exceed a much smaller amount.........." In the instant case we find the notification to be clear and to lead to no anomaly. The notification must, therefore, be re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
