SWARNA AND COMPANY COMMISSION AGENTS AND SUGARCANDY BISCUITS CONFECTIONARY MERCHANTS BEGUM BAZAR HYDERABAD Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the Judgment of Chinnappa Reddy, J., in Writ Petition No. 6941 of 1974. The question for our consideration is whether the appellant, a dealer in sugarcandy has to pay sales tax under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. Under section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, sales or purchases of declared goods by a dealer shall be liable to tax at the rate and only at the point of sale or purchase, specified against each in the Third Schedule on his turnover of such sales or purchases for each year. Item 12 in the third schedule is "sugar- candy" and it is to be taxed at the point of first sale in the State. Thus reading section 6 along with entry 12 in the Third Schedule, the appellant is liable to pay sales tax on the 'sugarcandy'. But the learned Counsel for the appellant, with reference to the definition of "declared goods", argued that 'sugar' includes 'sugarcandy' and since 'sugar' is exempted from the payment of sales tax under section 8 read with entry 6 in the Fourth Schedule, 'sugarcandy' also is exempt from the payment of sales tax. It is true that section 2 (f) of the Act, defines 'declared goods' as meaning goods declared under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Section 14 of the Central Sales tax Act, has declared certain goods and 'sugar' is one among them. Clause 8 of that section refers to 'sugar' as defined in item No. 1 of the first schedule to the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. Item No. i of the First Schedule to the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 reads as follows:

(2.) The fact that 'sugar' is not taxed under section 6 read with Item 12 of the third schedule will not make the imposition of sales tax on 'sugar candy' illegal.

(3.) Under section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be prescribed including conditions as to licences and licence fees, a dealer who deals in the goods specified in the Fourth Schedule shall be exempt from tax under the Act in respect of such goods. In the Fourth Schedule 'sugar' is shown as item 6, The Explanation to that schedule says that the expression in item 6 is to have the same meaning assigned to it in the additional duties of Excise (goods of special importance) Act, 1957. When we look to that Act, once again, it embodies the definition of 'sugar' as mentioned in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act. Thus, "sugar" as such is exempt from the sales tax. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that in view of the definition in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 'Sugar- candy' also is exempt from the sales tax under section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act read with entry 6 of Fourth Schedule. I am not able to agree with this contention. The fact that 'sugar and sugarcandy' are separately mentioned in difference Schedules of the Sales Tax Act indicates that the Legislature intended to treat them and treated them differently subjecting the one to tax and exempting the other from tax.