VICCO LABORATORIES Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER BOMBAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question involved in these appeals is as to whether the products known as Vicco Vajradanti tooth paste, tooth powder and Vicco Turmeric Vanishing Cream, are the proprietory Ayurvedic medicinal preparations or toilet requisites (schedule-items) for the purpose of levy of octroi, as enumerated vide Item 32 (a) of Schedule H of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act (the Act)?

(2.) THE respondent-Corporation on 30th April 1979 levied and recovered octroi on the products of the appellant-firm on their entry being made within its municipal limits. The appellants in appeals under section 217 of the Act before the Court of small causes, Bombay questioned the legality and correctness thereof. The Trial Court recorded a finding that the products are schedule items and liable to the payment of octroi duty. The Trial Court by orders dated 27th November 1981 which are impugned before me, dismissed the appeals.

(3.) IT is reiterated in the instant-appeals that the products are Ayurvedic medicinal preparations. They are produced from the natural herb and barks as prescribed by Authoritative Books on Ayurveda. These products are primarily meant for the teeth ailment or diseases and the Dentists prescribe them as medicine. The products are being manufactured under the Ayurvedic Medicine licence dated 1st June 1972 granted under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. Clause (c) of section 18 of the said Act prohibits manufacture and sale of such products in absence of licence. Moreover Sales Tax Authorities by order dated 31st July 1976 held that the tooth paste and tooth powder are the proprietory Ayurvedic medicine meant for mitigation or prevention of disease connected with teeth. It is urged that even after amendment with effect from 1st April, 1984 in Entry C-I-24 (i) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, excluding tooth paste and tooth powder from the category of medicine, the licence as granted on 1st June 1972 has not been withdrawn. It is further pointed out that Indian Standard Institution by its letters dated 29th May, 1979 has opined that these products since manufactured under the Ayurvedic Drugs Licence and being classified as Ayurvedic medicine, cannot be covered under the existing I. S. S. It is also pointed out that the Civil Court as regards payment of excise duty has held that the products are Ayurvedic medicinal preparations and this finding is confirmed in First Appeal No. 613 of 1982 by the Division Bench of this Court vide its judgment and order dated 27th April, 1988. It is therefore, submitted that the products cannot be treated differently for the purpose of sales tax or excise duty or payment of octroi, particularly when the Drugs authorities, Excise and Sales Tax authorities treated the products as Ayurvedic medicine. They as such could not be considered as toilet requisites for the payment of octroi duty.