R. Halasyam vs The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer and Others

Swamikkannu, J.—In these five writ petitions the proprietor of Deccan Engineers, Madurai, has raised a point that when the Authorities as

well as the Tribunal have held that the wet grinder comes only under the purview of Sl. No. 81 and collected 6 per cent tax now all of a sudden

because of the coming into existence of Item 41-B in the year 1977 under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, it is not open to the

department to collect tax at the rate of 12 per cent. For this view the learned Counsel for the petitioner had also taken me through the provision of

Sl. No. 33-C of First Schedule to the Central Excise and Salt Act wherein, according to him, ""Domestic electrical appliances"" have got a similar

connotation and meaning as contemplated under Item 81. In other words, the point that is raised on behalf of the petitioner in all these writ petitions

is that when the wet grinder is used for the purpose of grinding flour though electrically propelled, yet they can never come under the purview of

Item 41-B which came into existence in the year 1977. It is submitted that the wet grinders are classified only under Item 81 and this was the basis

for taxation for the years 1974-76, but subsequently because of coming into force of Item 41-B from 1977 the department wants to impose 12

per cent tax on wet grinders under item 41-B and not under Item 81. This conclusion of the department, according to the learned Counsel, is

wrong and as a matter of fact, he submits that the conclusion of bringing the wet grinders under the purview of Item 41-B is incorrect. The point for

consideration in all these writ petitions is whether ""Wet Grinders"" can be classified under item 41-B or under Item 81?

Item 81 and Item 41-B in the First Schedule of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act reads as follows:

A mere perusal of Item 41-B will clearly show that ""Wet Grinders"" come under domestic appliances. The domestic appliances are propelled and

run by electrical energy. Merely because the word ''Grinders'' alone appears in Item 41-B it is not excluded ""Wet Grinders"". Therefore under no

stretch of imagination the ""Wet Grinder"" can be excluded from the purview of classification of ""grinders"" under Item 41-B. Therefore the

classification made from the year 1977 after the entry coming into force under Item 41-B in the enactment and assessed on that basis holding that

such percentage of tax that has to be paid by the assessee, cannot be said to be irregular, illegal or opposed to the concept, underlying the

provision of the enactment. Therefore there is no substance in the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. It is also pointed out

by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that Item 41-B came into force from 13-9-1977 and therefore the department has a right to levy tax from

that date under item 41-B. It is made clear by this Court that 12% tax has to be collected from 13-9-77. In the circumstances, Writ Petition Nos.

5985 and 5987 are dismissed. There is no order as to costs.

Writ Petition Nos. 5893 and 5894 of 1981 relates to the years 1975-76 and 1976-77 and there cannot be a tax at 12 per cent. Therefore Writ

Petition Nos. 5893 and 1894 of 1981 are allowed and the tax collected from the petitioner at the rate of 12 per cent under Item 41-B will be

refunded to the petitioner with respect to these petitions. So far as the other petitions are concerned, they are governed by Item 41-B which came

into existence under the provisions of the enactment on 13-9-1977.

As regards W.P. No. 5896 of 1981, it is submitted that tax has to be collected for the period from 1-4-1977 to 13-9-1977 only under item

41-B for the subsequent assessment year 1977-78. Writ Petition No. 5896 of 1987 is remanded to the Assessing Authority in order to assess tax

as stated above and to collect tax amount due and payable by the petitioner herein for the year 1977-78. There is no order as to costs in all the

petitions.