TMI Blog1963 (4) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the decision of the High Court dismissing a writ petition filed by the appellants is challenged. Section 5 of the Act is the charging section under which dealers are liable to pay sales tax on their turnover. Under sub-section (3)(a) of this section, read with Schedule II to the Act, cotton textile goods which was the commodity in which the appellants were dealing, were liable to tax at a single point. Section 9 of the Act enabled the State Government to exempt the tax leviable under the Act. In exercise of the power thus conferred a notification was issued on December 13, 1957, which read: "In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (Andhra Pradesh Act VI of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby exempts from the tax payable under the said Act, with effect on and from the 14th December 1957, the sale or purchase of any of the goods appended hereto: Provided that in the case of any class of such goods in respect of which additional duties of excise are leviable by the Central Government under clause 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Levy and Di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a result a writ petition was filed in the High Court under Aritcle 226 by the appellants praying for a direction for quashing the notice issued by the Sales Tax Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh calling upon them to pay the sales tax on these goods. It is now necessary to mention that the validity of the action of the Sales Tax Officials-the Commercial Tax Officer, the second respondent-making the demand was impugned by the appellants not merely on the ground that no tax was payable by them by reason of the above notification but also on various other grounds including the constitutional invalidity of the Sales Tax Act itself and in particular the provisions imposing sales tax on textile goods. The learned judges dismissed their petition rejecting everyone of the contentions urged, and the appellants have come up in appeal after obtaining special leave. It must, however, be mentioned that the argument regarding the constitutional invalidity of the Act and the rules were not repeated before us and the only point arising for consideration is as regards the construction of the notification. Before proceeding further it would be convenient to set out the grounds on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsequence directed the dismissal of the writ petition. It is the correctness of this interpretation that is challenged before us. Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that on a plain reading of the notification the appellants were entitled to the benefit of the exemption if para 1 stood alone. This submission has to be accepted and we heard no serious argument against it. The competence of the State Government to grant an exemption, whether qualified or unqualified, not being in dispute, the only question for consideration is whether the effect of the first paragraph of the notification has been qualified or modified by the rest of the notification including the conditions imposed thereunder. Learned counsel for the respondent relied on the same two lines of reasoning on which the High Court has decided the writ petition. He stressed before us in particular the argument based on the use of the words "any class of such goods" in the proviso. The 1st paragraph of the notification grants an exemption which, if it stood alone, provides that no sales tax would be leviable on and from December 14, 1957, on the sale or purchase of every variety of textiles. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e because of the situs in which they are lying or are stocked, they would not be the class of goods in respect of which duties of excise are leviable, for the essential condition for the proviso to be brought into operation is the liability of the goods to the levy of the additional duty. It therefore appears to us that the expression "class of such goods" has to be understood as being a reference not merely to the goods specified in the opening words of clause 3(1) of the Bill but to such goods as fall within the entirety of that taxing provision and in respect of which therefore the additional duty would be leviable, for in respect of cotton fabrics produced in India per so or simpliciter no excise duty would be leviable unless they are at the premises which are specified in the latter portion of clause 3(1) of the Bill. Both these conditions are necessary to exist before the duty of excise is "leviable" and when the proviso therefore uses the words "any class of such goods" it could only refer to the class of goods named in the 1st para of clause 3(1)-lying, stored or stocked in the places referred to in the concluding portion of the clause. There is another aspect from which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of the exemption he cannot be denied its benefit by calling in aid any supposed intention of the exempting authority. If such intention can be gathered from the construction of the words of the statute or rule or by necessary implication therefrom, the matter is different, but that is not the position here. In this connection we might refer to the observations of Lord Watson in Salomon v. Salomon and Co. [1897] A.C. 22 at p. 38.: "Intention of the Legislature is a common but very slippery phrase which, popularly understood, may signify anything from intention em- bodied in positive enactment to speculative opinion as to what the Legislature probably would have meant, although there has been an omission to enact it. In a Court of Law or Equity, what the legislature intended to be done or not to be done can only be legitimately ascertained from that which it has chosen to enact, either in express words or by reasonable and necessary implication." Learned counsel for the State is possibly right in the submission that the object behind the framers of the notification was to avoid double taxation but the operation of an enactment or of a notification has to be judged not by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
