Supreme Court of India

M/S. SHIV SHAKTI GOLD FINGERversusASSTI. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, JAIPUR

Citation: 1996 INSC 683
Decided: 10 May 1996
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Bench: K RAMASWAMYG B PATTANAIK

Holding

The exemption notification covers all varieties of papad, including Gole Papad, and therefore the appellant is entitled to sales tax exemption.

Summary

Shiv Shakti Gold Finger applied for exemption from Rajasthan sales tax on its Gole Papad, a circular snack made of maida, salt, starch, papad soda, alum and food colour, invoking a 1970 notification that exempted "Papad and Badi (Mangori)". The Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim, holding that the exemption did not extend to Gole Papad. The Sales Tax Tribunal reversed, interpreting the word "Papad" as a genus covering all varieties regardless of shape or ingredients, and granted the exemption. The State appealed, and the Rajasthan High Court set aside the Tribunal’s order, denying the exemption. On special leave, the Supreme Court examined whether the notification’s language intended to exclude certain forms of papad and concluded that it was meant to cover all types, including Gole Papad. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, restoring the Tribunal’s decision and confirming the appellant’s entitlement to exemption. The judgment also noted that the government could amend the notification if necessary.

Issues considered

Whether the term "Papad" in the 1970 exemption notification under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, includes Gole Papad made of ingredients other than pulses.
Whether the exemption notification should be interpreted to cover all varieties of papad irrespective of shape or composition.

Legislation cited

Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954s. 4(2)

Subjects

sales taxexemptionnotification interpretationpapadRajasthan Sales Tax Actgenus-speciesspecial leaveappellate jurisdiction

Judgment

A                      M/S. SHIV SHAKTI GOLD FINGER
                                          v.
        ASSTI. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, JAIPUR

                                   MAY 10, 1996

B                (K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATIANAIK, JJ.]

            Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 :

           S.4(2)-Notification dated 9.3.1970-'Papad and Badi' (Mangori)-Ex-
C   empted from sales tW>-'Gole papad'-Held, also covered by the notifica-
    tion-If need be, Government may make necessary declaration in exemption
    notification itself by way of amendment.

            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9074 of
    1996.
D
         From the Judgment and Order dated 18.4.91 of the Rajasthan High
    Court in S.B.S.T.R. No. 110 of 1987.

         K.K. Jain, Ajay K. Jain, Shashi Bhushan and Pramod Dayal for the
    Appellant.
E
            Aruneshwar Gupta for the Respondent.

            The following Order of the Court was delivered :

            Leave granted.
F
        This appeal by special leave arises from the order and judgment
  dated April 18, 1991 made in Sales Tax Revision No. 110 of 1987 by the
  High Conrt of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench. The respondent-State exercising
  the power under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, (for
  short, the 'Act') by a notification dated March 9, 1970 had exempted
G Papad and Badi, i.e. Mangori from sales tax. When the appellant made an
  application for exemption of Gole Papad manufactured out of Maida, Salt
  Starch, Papad Soda, Alum and Food colour from sales tax under the above .
  notification, the Addi. Commissioner by proceedings dated 27.8.82 held
  that Gole Papad was not covered by the notification. When the appeal
H came to be filed, the Sales Tax Tribunal by its order dated 17.3.86 allowed
                                      848
           SHIV SHAKTI GOLD FINGER v. ASST. COMMR. COMMERCIAL TAXES 849


    the appeal and held that the notification would govern all variety of Papad,     A
    whether they are circular or flat in shape consisting of all the ingredients
    whether it is pulses, rice, maida, etc. When the State carried the matter in
    revision, it came to be allowed by the High Court and it held that the
    appellant is not entitled to the exemption. Thus this appeal by special leave.

           It is seen that the notification clearly mentions that the word 'Papad' B '
    has been used a genus and its species are made from pulses, rice, maida,
    potato, sago etc. In the notification the words "Papad and Badi", i.e.
    Mangori have been used while in entry No. 3 of the notification after the
    words "letter head pads" the words "other stationery articles made of
    handmade paper" have been used meaning thereby that entry No. 3 is not C
    restricted to only invitation cards, envelopes, file covers, letter head pads
    but also includes other stationery articles made of handmade paper. The
    question is : whether the ingredients of papad are exclusively composed of
    the pulses or maida or rice, etc.? When the notification mentions pap ad
    and Badi, i.e. Mangori it would appear that they did not intend to differen-
    tiate between gole or flat papad made of any ingredient.                       D

          Under those circumstances it appears that the interpretation given
    by the High Court is not correct and that of Tribunal is correct.

          The appeal is allowed and if there is any difficulty it would be open
    to the Govt. to make necessary ckclaration in exemption notification itself      E
    by way of amendment. No costs.

    R.P.                                                        Appeal allowed.




"

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "sales tax"Sign in to search