Classification of goods - Impact of use of punctuation mark

While deciding the issue of classification of goods being rexine cloth under the Schedule B of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, in the case of Jasch Plastics India Ltd. Versus The State of Haryana - 2016 (9) TMI 1083 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, honorable High Court has observed that,

"Once a punctuation mark has a specific meaning, it has to be given effect to. It cannot be treated as otiose. Meaning thereby, there is a break in sentence at that stage. It is also evident from a plain reading of the entry itself, which uses the word 'and' in between “leather cloth” & “inferior or imitation leather cloth ordinarily used in book binding”. Thereafter, punctuation mark “colon” has been used, which is followed by other types of goods mentioned therein by using the word 'or' therein and finally using the word 'and' with a condition that additional excise duty in lieu of sales tax is levied on them. In case, there is a break in sentence, then certainly the condition of levy of additional excise duty in lieu of sales tax will not be applicable to the goods mentioned in the first part thereof. The entry can be read as “leather cloth and inferior or imitation leather cloth ordinarily used in book binding” and “rubber used tissue or synthetic water tissue or synthetic water-proof fabrics whether single textured or double textured and book-binding cotton fabrics provided additional Excise Duty in lieu of sales tax is levied on them”. The manner in which the entry was there before substitution w.e.f. 30.6.2005 is also supportive of this view, as in the entry as existed earlier, all the goods had been mentioned in a different column, whereas the condition of levy of additional excise duty was mentioned in different column. In that situation, even a break in the sentence may not be important as all the goods mentioned in the entry were required to comply with exceptions and conditions as provided. The observation made by the Tribunal in the order that the matter was never argued in that line is merely to be discarded for the reason that there is no estoppel against the statute. The manufacturers of these products were satisfied as they were being granted exemption from payment of tax. The issue arose only after the additional excise duty in lieu of sales tax was abolished. "

See:- Jasch Plastics India Ltd. Versus The State of Haryana - 2016 (9) TMI 1083 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT