AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramanujam, J.—In this tax revision case filed by the State, the order of the Tribunal cancelling the penalty levied u/s 10(b) of the Central
Sales Tax Act has been questioned. It is seen that the assessee has purchased plugs, flanges, top and bottom die from other States to the tune of
Rs. 1,21,440 during the assessment year 1978-79 and obtained C forms from the outer State seller. At the stage of the assessment, the assessing
officer held that the above articles purchased by the assessee are not covered by the certificate of registration given to the assessee in form B and
therefore, the penalty is leviable u/s 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act. In this view he levied a penalty of Rs. 18,366. On appeal, the Appellate
Assistant Commissioner confirmed the levy of penalty. When the matter went before the Tribunal on an appeal filed by the assessee, the Tribunal
has held that the entries found in the certificate of registration obtained by the assessee in form B would cover the said items purchased by the
assessee for use as raw material for the manufacture of drums.
It is not disputed before us that the plugs, flanges, top and bottom die purchased by the assessee have in fact been used by the assessee as raw
materials for the manufacture of drums. The question is whether these items are covered by the certificate of registration. The relevant extract from
the certificate of registration in form B is as follows :
According to the Revenue, the certificate of registration can be taken to cover not all raw materials, but only raw materials like 26, 24 and 22
gauge CRCS sheets. According to the assessee, however, the certificate of registration should be taken to cover all raw materials required for the
manufacture of drums and the expression ""like 26, 24 and 22 gauge CRCS sheets"" is only descriptive and not exhaustive of the raw materials. We
are not in a position to agree with the contention of the learned Additional Government Pleader that the entry should be taken to cover only raw
materials named therein and not all raw materials and the raw materials named are only 26, 24 and 22 gauge CRCS sheets and not any other raw
material. If we are to accept the said submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader, then it is unnecessary to refer to ""raw materials"" in
the certificate of registration and in their place ""26, 24 and 22 gauge CRCS sheets"" can be mentioned. Therefore, the expression ""raw materials
like 26, 24 and 22 gauges CRCS sheets"" could be taken to be only descriptive or illustrative and not exhaustive. This is the view taken by the
Tribunal. So long as the goods purchased by the issue of C forms had in fact been used as raw material in the manufacture of drums, then those
articles should be covered by the certificate of registration, for, the raw materials for the manufacture of drums have been referred to. We are not
in a position to restrict the operation of the expression ""raw material"" merely because of the following words ""like 26, 24 and 22 gauge CRCS
sheets"".
If the expression ""raw materials, namely, 26, 24 and 22 gauge CRCS sheets"", then the submission made by the learned Additional Government
Pleader is possible of acceptance. But where the word ""like"" is used, it does not restrict the meaning attributable to the expression ""raw materials"".
In this view, we are inclined to agree with the Tribunal that there is no violation of section 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The tax revision case
is accordingly dismissed.