COMMISSIONER SALES TAX Vs. BHAGWAN DAS HARI DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed by the Commissioner . of Sales Tax, against the order dated 4th June, 1986 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Varanasi, relating to the assessment year 1975-76. During the said year, the assessee carried on the business in jute goods, newar, etc. The goods dealt with by the assessee were purchased both within Uttar Pradesh and outside Uttar Pradesh. Originally, vide assessment order dated 16th August, 1979, the assessment was framed for the above assessment year by the Sales Tax Officer under Rule 41(7) of the U. P. Sales Tax Rules, hereinafter referred to as the Rules. Subsequently, proceedings under Section 21 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, were initiated against the assessee for the above assessment year on the ground that tax on coir matting has been assessed at a lower rate and proper tax payable on the same was as unclassified item. The assessee disputed both the initiation of the aforesaid proceedings under Section 21 of the said Act as well as the question that the said goods are liable to be taxed as unclassified item. The Sales Tax Officer, however, completed the assessment under Section 21 of the said Act vide his order dated 30th March, 1982, and appeal against the same filed by the assessee was also dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) vide order dated 26th November, 1982. The assessee took the matter further in appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal. After hearing counsel for the parties the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee under the impugned order on two counts. Firstly, that the goods in question are made of jute, and therefore, fell within the classification of jute and cannot be termed and taxed as unclassified item. Secondly, after reviewing the facts of the case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that this was a case of change of opinion. The Tribunal was of the view that the appeal had to be allowed and it allowed the same accordingly. The Commissioner of Sales Tax has now filed the present revision against the aforesaid order of the Tribunal in this Court.

(2.) I have heard the learned Standing Counsel. Two submissions have been made by the learned counsel appearing for the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The first is that coir goods are not jute goods and the second is that it is not a case of change of opinion. The Tribunal has under the impugned order recorded the following finding : ...It has not been disputed that the mat, coir mat and the matting taken to be unclassified by the assessing authority are made of jute. Naturally, had the legislature intended to take these goods out of the purview of the jute goods, it would have concluded them by making a specific provision and would not have treated the jute goods of all types as classified item. In ordinary parlance also jute goods implies and means all goods made of jute. I am afraid that in absence of any specified provision, mat, coir mat and foot mats made of jute could have been taken out of jute goods and held exigible to tax as unclassified items.

(3.) The learned Standing Counsel sought to dispute the aforesaid findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal by relying upon the dictionary meaning of the word "coir" as well as the definition of the word "jute" as stated under Section 4 of the Central Sales Tax Act.