SARDAR JOGENDRA SINGH Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution raise a common point and can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) THE point raised is that rab or jaggery is "agricultural or horticultural produce, grown by a person or grown on any land in which he has interest", within the meaning of the proviso to section 2(i) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act and is, as such, excluded from computation of "turnover", and consequently exempt from payment of sales tax. It seems to me that the expression "agricultural or horticultural produce grown by a person" cannot properly be used when speaking of rab or jaggery. One may speak of wheat, or rice, or pulses as agricultural produce grown by a person, but one cannot speak of rab being grown.

(3.) THE precise form of words with which we are concerned and this very question came up for consideration in two cases before the Madras High Court, one a Division Bench case reported in K. P. Vaidyanatha Iyer v. The State of Madras ([1954] 5 S.T.C. 94.) and the other a single Judge case reported in State of Madras v. V. R. B. Gopalarathnam Gupta ([1957] 8 S.T.C. 16.). I respectfully agree with the decision in those cases.