Skip to content


Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Prayag Ice and Oil Mills - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case Number Sales Tax Revision No. 176 of 1983
Judge
Reported in[1986]61STC81(All)
AppellantCommissioner of Sales Tax
RespondentPrayag Ice and Oil Mills
Appellant Advocate Bharatji Agarwal, Adv.
Respondent Advocate The Standing Counsel
DispositionPetition dismissed
Excerpt:
- - 1. this revision filed by the revenue for the assessment year 1981-82 raises a very interesting question as to whether rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are one and the same thing......by the revenue for the assessment year 1981-82 raises a very interesting question as to whether rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are one and the same thing. the commissioner took the view that both are one and the same thing and rice bran having been excluded from the term 'cattle fodder', the de-oiled rice bran should be deemed to have been excluded by the notification from the term 'cattle fodder', which is exempt. the tribunal did not agree with the commissioner and concluded that the rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are two different commodities, technically and commercially and, therefore, de-oiled rice bran cannot be said to have been excluded from the term 'cattle fodder', which is exempt from tax on the ground that rice bran has been excluded by notification from the entry.....
Judgment:

Om Prakash, J.

1. This revision filed by the revenue for the assessment year 1981-82 raises a very interesting question as to whether rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are one and the same thing. The Commissioner took the view that both are one and the same thing and rice bran having been excluded from the term 'cattle fodder', the de-oiled rice bran should be deemed to have been excluded by the notification from the term 'cattle fodder', which is exempt. The Tribunal did not agree with the Commissioner and concluded that the rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are two different commodities, technically and commercially and, therefore, de-oiled rice bran cannot be said to have been excluded from the term 'cattle fodder', which is exempt from tax on the ground that rice bran has been excluded by notification from the entry exempting 'cattle fodder' from tax. In my view, the question whether rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are one and the same thing can be decided merely by common sense, than referring to a catena of authorities. I put straightaway a question to the learned standing counsel : whether de-oiled rice bran has a direct link with cattle fodder and whether it can be used only as a cattle fodder or for something else also He has not pointed any other use of de-oiled rice bran except the one that it can be used only as a 'cattle fodder'. When de-oiled rice bran can be used only as 'cattle fodder', the irresistible conclusion which can be arrived at is that de-oiled rice bran is nothing but cattle fodder, which is exempt from tax. The Tribunal also referred to the opinions of H. B. T. I., Kanpur, and of G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology. Both support the view point that rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are two different things. Rice bran is a by-product of paddy and de-oiled rice bran is a byproduct of rice bran. By-product of a by-product cannot retain the same character everywhere. So the simple test for determining the question, whether rice bran and de-oiled rice bran are one and the same thing, is whether de-oiled rice bran can be used for anything else than cattle fodder. No other use having been pointed out, I uphold the order of the Tribunal that de-oiled rice bran is nothing but cattle fodder exempt from tax. De-oiled rice bran cannot be subjected to tax until and unless it is specifically made liable to tax by any notification.

2. This revision is dismissed. Parties will bear their own costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //