Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
M\S SIRDANWAL INDUSTRIES
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/08/1996
BENCH:
BHARUCHA S.P. (J)
BENCH:
BHARUCHA S.P. (J)
MAJMUDAR S.B. (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCALE (5)756
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
The order under appeal is of the High Court at
Allahabad in revision petitions filed by the Commissioner of
Sales Tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The question for
consideration was whether brass wire manufactured by the
assessee was classifiable as ’brassware’ as claimed by the
Revenue or under a notification dated 6.10.1971 issued under
sub-section (2) of Section 3-A which mentioned "copper, tin,
nickel or zinc, or any other alloy containing any of these
metals".
The High Court rightly proceeded upon the basis that
the brass wire manufactured by the assessee was an alloy of
copper and zinc. It, however, rejected the argument that, as
such, it was covered under the aforementioned entry in the
notification. It emphasized the words ’any of these metals’
in the entry and observed that if an alloy consisted of more
than one of the metals mentioned in the entry, it would not
be covered by it. An alloy, in its view, with copper or tin
or nickel or zinc would be covered by the entry, but an
alloy comprising more than one of these metals was beyond
its scope. The High Court also relied upon the subsequent
entry in the notification and observed that the use of the
word ’all’ in that entry and its omission in the relevant
entry indicated that the intention was to confine the lower
rate of tax only to those alloys which comprised only one of
the metals named.
On a plain reading of the entry, we find it difficult
to agree. Brass is an alloy. It contains copper and zinc.
It, therefore, contains a metal mentioned in the entry. The
entry applies to an alloy containing any of these metals. It
applies, therefore, to brass. It is of no consequence that
the alloy (brass) contains more than one of the metals
mentioned in the entry.
The conclusion that we have reached is fortified by the
judgment of this Court in M/s Saru Smelting (P) Ltd., vs.
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Lucknow, 1993 Supp. (3) SCC 97,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
where the entry was very similar, namely, ’copper, tin,
nickel or any other alloy containing any of these metals
only". The Court said:-
"The emphasis in the entry is
-- either it should be pure copper,
tin, nickel or zinc and if it is an
alloy containing two or more
metals, it must be an alloy
containing these metals only".
Since the alloy in question before the Court there contained
phosphorous, which was not one of the metals mentioned in
the entry, the alloy was held to fall outside the entry.
Brass wire, therefore, falls within the entry in the
said notification.
The appeals are allowed. The judgment under appeal is
set aside. The revision petitions filed before the High
Court are dismissed.
There shall be on order as to costs.