TMI Blog1987 (4) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification. As the power both for the grant of exemption and the variation of the rate of tax vests in the State Government and it is not the requirement of the statute that a notification of recall of exemption is a condition precedent to imposing tax at any prescribed rate by a valid notification under Section 3A, we see no force in the contention of the assessee which has been upheld by the High Court. In fact, the second notification can easily be treated as a combined notification - both for withdrawal of exemption and also for providing higher tax. When power for both the operations vests in the State arid the intention to levy the tax is clear we see no justification for not giving effect to the 2nd notification. We would like to point out that the exemption was in regard to a class of goods and while the exemption continues, a specific item has now been notified under Section 3A of the Act. The appeal is allowed. - 1134(NT) of 1987 - - - Dated:- 29-4-1987 - R.S. Pathak, C.J.I., Ranganath Misra and B.C. Ray, JJ. Prithvi Raj, Senior Advocate (Ashok K. Srivastava, Advocate, with him), for the appellant. S.T. Desai, Senior Advocate (K.B. Rohtagi, S.K. Dhingra, B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation under Section 3A prescribes the rate of tax, it is beyond doubt that the intention is to withdraw the exemption and make the sale liable to tax at the rate prescribed in the notification. As the power both for the grant of exemption and the variation of the rate of tax vests in the State Government and it is not the requirement of the statute that a notification of recall of exemption is a condition precedent to imposing tax at any prescribed rate by a valid notification under Section 3A, we see no force in the contention of the assessee which has been upheld by the High Court. In fact, the second notification can easily be treated as a combined notification - both for withdrawal of exemption and also for providing higher tax. When power for both the operations vests in the State arid the intention to levy the tax is clear we see no justification for not giving effect to the 2nd notification. We would like to point out that the exemption was in regard to a class of goods and while the exemption continues, a specific item has now been notified under Section 3A of the Act. 7. The appeal is allowed. The order of the Tribunal which has been affirmed by the High Court is set a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in its character as a textile. It may be used for making wearing apparel, or it may be used as a covering or bed-sheet or it may be used as tapestry or upholstery or as duster for clearing or as towel for drying the body. A textile may have diverse uses and it is not the use which determines its character as textile. 9. It was also held that the textile has only one meaning namely a woven fabric and that is the meaning which it bears in ordinary parlance. The Court therefore held that dryer felts are textiles as these were made of yarn and the process employed was that of weaving according to warp and woof pattern. It therefore falls within the meaning of textiles and so exempted from tax. 10. Similar question arose in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Navinchandra Company [1981 (48) S.T.C. 118 (Mad.)] where exemption was claimed on the basis of a notification under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 in respect of hair-belting and cotton-belting as falling within Item No. 4 of the Third Schedule of the said Act. This Item No. 4 reads as follows :- All varieties of textiles (other than durries carpets, druggets and pure silk cloth) made wholly or p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the effect of a notification under Section 3A including an item in the Schedule for imposition of sales tax though there is a general exemption from sales tax under Section 4 of the Sales Tax Act. It has been held in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. M/s. Dayal Singh Kulfi Wala, Lucknow = 1980 U.P.T.C. 360 as follows :- A fiscal statute like the one before me has to be interpreted strictly. If there is any ambiguity or doubt it should be resolved in favour of the subject. There is no equity about tax. The taxing liability must be express and absolute. In the present case, the specification of the goods for purposes of Section 3A is one thing, but whether or not such goods would be exempted from tax is the power conferred upon the State Government under Section 4 of the Act. So long the exemption continues, the dealer can certainly urge and with justification that the mere specification of goods under Section 3A or declaring the point of sales at such turnover liable to tax would not take away the exemption from payment of tax which the goods enjoyed by virtus of the exercise of power by the State Government under Section 4 of the Act. The operating fields of the two s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
