Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs V. Saraswathi

Thanikkachalam, J.—At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court

under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 :

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the business of the firm in which the assessee is

partner, would constitute undertaking engaged in the distribution of power and accordingly the assessee is entitled to the relief under s. 5(1)(xxxii)

of the WT Act, 1957 ?

The assessee, V. Saraswathi, was assessed to tax on the share income derived from Standard Appliances, Madurai, a firm carrying on the

business in supply of gas cylinder processed by Indian Oil Company for domestic consumption. For the asst. yr. 1974-75, the assessee filed WT

return claiming exemption under s. 5(1)(xxxii) of the WT Act (hereinafter referred to as ""the Act"") in respect of the share capital on the ground that

the firm in which she is a partner has to be construed as an industrial company as defined in the Expln. 2 to s. 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act. The WTO

held that the firm in which the assessee is a partner is not an industrial undertaking engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity

or any other form of power and that the firm is only carrying on a trading activity in purchasing and selling of gas cylinders and that, therefore, the

assessee is not entitled to exemption.

On appeal, the AAC confirmed the order passed by the WTO. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held

that as far as the business of the firm in which the assessee is a partner, is concerned, distribution through containers such as gas cylinders would

constitute distribution of power and hence, the assessee is entitled to the exemption under s. 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act and allowed the appeal.

The learned junior standing counsel appearing for the Department submitted that gas is not power, but it is only a source of power. According to

the learned standing counsel, there are various forms of power apart from electricity. They are solar power, wind power and hydro electric power,

etc. and the words ""any power"" should be understood as ejusdem generis. In order to support his contention, the learned standing counsel relied

upon the meaning of the words ""fuel"" and ""power"" as given in Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary - Indian print of the year 1991 wherein

at p. 58 the word ""fuel"" is defined as something such as wood, coal, oil or petrol that is burned in order to provide heat or power. In the said

dictionary at p. 1123, ""power"" is defined as energy that is obtained by burning fuel or by using wind or sun, especially when it is used to make

machine work or to produce electricity. ""Power"" is also used to mean electricity. Therefore, according to the learned standing counsel, gas is not

power since the source of power is not power by itself, and, therefore, the Tribunal was not correct in stating that the business of the firm in which

the assessee is a partner constitutes an undertaking engaged in the distribution of power.

On the other hand, while supporting the order passed by the Tribunal, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that gas is also a

form of power and that power would include any form of energy as commonly understood. According to the learned counsel for the assessee, if

the source of power is distributed, that would also come under the caption ""any form of power"", which means energy and inasmuch as gas was

distributed through cylinders, it would amount to distribution of power through containers and, therefore, the business of the firm in which the

assessee is a partner would constitute an undertaking engaged in the distribution of power.

We have heard the learned standing counsel for the Department as well as the learned counsel for the assessee. The point for consideration is,

whether the assessee is a partner in a firm which is an industrial undertaking engaged in the distribution of power so as to entitle her to claim the

relief under s. 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act.

We have already stated, what is mentioned in Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary. According to the Oxford Dictionary, ""power

means vigour of energy, mechanical energy as opposed to hand labour, the capacity for exerting mechanical force. It is no doubt true that power

would include any form of energy as commonly understood. But, power would not include source of power. Power can be generated through

various sources. Coal, kerosene, oil and gas constitute source of power and they would not by themselves become power or energy. If it is power,

it can be directly applied to get energy and if it is fuel, it should be oxidised for getting energy. Therefore, gas which is fuel cannot be considered as

power as contended by the learned counsel for the assessee. Accordingly, we hold that the firm in which assessee is a partner, is not an industrial

undertaking engaged in the distribution of power. In that view of the matter, the exemption under s. 5(1)(xxxii) of the Act cannot be granted to the

assessee.

In the result, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favour of the Department. There will be no order as to costs.