Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, THANE & ANR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
H & R JOHNSON (INDIA) LTD. & ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/08/1996
BENCH:
THOMAS K.T. (J)
BENCH:
THOMAS K.T. (J)
BHARUCHA S.P. (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (7) 473 1996 SCALE (5)590
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
THOMAS. J.
The question to be determined in this appeal has boiled
down to a very narrow compass-whether the "clay" imported by
the respondents for manufacturing ceramic tiles can be
brought within the ambit of the item described as "earth of
any other kind ", in Entry No.47 of class IV of Schedule I
of the Maharashtra Municipalities (Octroi) Rules,1968. (for
short the Rules. Respondents contended that the clay
imported by them within the said category which contention
was found favour with the high Court of Bombay in the writ
petition filed by the respondent.The said decision is now
being challenged in this appeal.
The question came up through the facts of this case
which are summarized as follows;
Respondents are manufacturing ceramist tiles in their
factory situated within the limits of Thane Municipal
Corporation (Maharashtra State) . The main ingredient used
for the said product is clay which respondent used get down
from Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh. Under Section 105 of the
Maharashtra Municipalties Act, 1965, the municipal
corporation is empowered to levy octroi duty on the goods
brought into the territorial limits of the municipal
corporation at a rate not exceeding the maximum limit
prescribed by the Rules.Goods are classified in Schedule I
of the Rules for fixing different rates of octroi duty. In
this case, we are only concerned with the classified in
Entries 45 and 47 of the Schedule.
Entry No.45 thereof consists of coal tar,asphait,
bitumen, flooring stone, mangenese, emery stone or powder,
chalk powder, stone chips, stone powder, Agra stone, stone
for building clinker and coal ash. In respect of those goods
Thane Municipal Corpration decided to levy the maxmium
octroi duty of 4% on the value prescribed by the Rules.
Entry 47 consists of yellow earth and earth of any other
kind, sand, metal, rubble, murum and gravel, for which the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
Corporation is empowered to levy a maximum of Rs. 2/- per
metric tonne. However, as for those goods. Thane Municipal
Corporatiopn has resolved to levy octroi duty only at the
rate of Re.1/- per metric tonne.
Respondents pleaded that the clay imported by them
shall be counted as "earth of any other kind". But the
Municipal Corporation insisted that the respondents should
pay higher octroi duty as the clay is "stone power"
mentioned in Entry No.45.
Respondents filed the writ petition in the High Court
contending that the sand of municipal corporation is
erroneous and hence they may be inhibited from collecting
octroi duty at the higher rats. The High Court found in the
impugned judgment that this clay would fall within Entry
No.47 and as such respondents are liable to pay octroi duty
only at the lesser rate of Re.1/- per metric tonne. On the
strength of the said finding the High Court directed the
Corporation to refund the excess amount collected from the
respondents on and after the date of writ petition.
Learned counsel for the appellant Corporation assailed
the conclusion of the High Court contending that the
expression "clay" as understood in common parlance is
contradistinct the meaning attached to the word "earth".
Counsel also contended that the raw material used by the
respondents being a special guilty of chins clay, the same
could only have been classified as "stone power" mentioned
in entry 45 of the Schedule. Alternatively, it was contended
that High Court should not have ordered refund if the amount
already collected.
In support of the first contention a reference was made
to the observation contained in the decision of a Division
Bench of the Calcutta High Court in state and ors. (AIR 1969
Calcutta High Court in state of west Bengal & ors.vs.
Jagdamba Prasad Singh and ors. (AIR 1*969 Calcutta 281) that
"ordinary earth is not ordinary clay and cannot be called a
minor mineral and the word clay is not identical with
"earth". Counsel brought to our notice that the aforesaid
observation was approved by the full Bench of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court in M/s. Amar Singh Modi Lal vs. State of
Haryana and ors. (AIR 1972 Punjab & Haryana 356.) After
going through the relevant passage in the decisions cited
before us, we do not think that any such passing observation
would be of help to decides this dispute. That apart, the
Calcutta High Court was not inclined to extricate clay from
earth for all purposes by pointing out in the decision that
there are some kind of earth which may be clay. The full in
Amar Singhs case (supra) has in fact skipped that issue by
observing that the said aspect does not have even a remote
connection with the question involved in the case before
them.
Amount the goods catalogued in Entry No.45 of the
Schedule only one item need be considered in this context
and that is "stone power" because no other item mentioned in
the said entry in the said entry has even a semblance with
the clay involved in this case. Nor did the appellant make
any attempt to; show that is clay anything other than power.
We must point out in this context that the burden is on
appellant to show that clay imported by the respondents is
stone power when they entry . But no material, whatsoever,
has been produced in proof of their stand.
The meaning or definition provided in standard
dictionaries to word " clay" would not help the appellant
who made an endeavor to trace out some support from such
lexicons. In the websters Dictionary "clay" is shown "a"
natural earthy material ...used chiefly for making bricks:
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
used in earth or mud". In the Concise Oxford Dictionary
"clay" is given the meaning as "stiff tenacious earth." In
Chambers (Twentieth Century )Dictionary it is defined as
"earth in fine particles."
Therefore, we find no merit in the contention of the
appellant Corporation that the clay imported by the
respondents must be kept outside the amount of Entry 47 of
Schedule I of the Rules.
The alternative contention regarding refund of the
amount (as ordered by High Court ) was advanced before us
on the premiss that it would badly erode the financial
position of the Corporation-at any rate, the appellant may
be denied of the higher duty only from the date when the
controversy is set at rest. and all that is done or
collection till then need not be reimbursed.
We may point out that when respondents maved for an
interim order before the High Court of Bombay for stay of
collection of octroi duty at the higher rate the following
order was passed on the application on 13th March 1992.
"Heard counsel. Interim relief
refused. The payment of Octroi duty
be stayed. In case petitioner
succeeds the respondents will
refund the excess duty."
Parties are bound by the said order it is too late in
the day for the appellant to make a plea on the strength of
financial burden etc. Refund has rightly been ordered by the
High Court and it calls for no intervention by us.
We dismised this appeal without any order as to costs.