Civil Appeal No 1773 of 1971
From the Judgment and order dated 20 2 1970 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc
Writ Petition No 294369 SC Manchanda and OP Rana for the Appellants
VS Desai PB Agarwala and BR Agarwala for the Respondents
838 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JASWANT SINGH J
This appeal by certificate which is directed against the judgment and order dated February 20 1970 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in writ petition No 2943 of 1969 raises two interesting ques tions viz  1  whether carbon paper is paper falling within the purview of the word paper  as used in serial No 2 of Notification Ng
ST 3124X 10124 1964 dated July 1 1966 issued by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh in exercise of the power vested in him under section 3 A of the UP Sales Fax Act 1948 UP Act No XV of 1948 so as to be liable to sales tax at the point and at the rate specified in the Schedule to the Notification and 2 whether ribbon is an accessory or a part of the typewriter
It appears that the respondent which is a company incor porated under the Indian Companies Act dealing in carbon paper typewriter ribbon stepler machines and stepler pins despatches the said goods from its head office at Bombay to its branch office at Kanpur wherefrom sales there of are effected in the State of Uttar Pradesh
During the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1956 57 the respondent claimed that carbon paper not being paper falling within the ambit of Entry No 2 of the Schedule to the aforesaid Notification but a specialised article used for copying purposes its turnover had to be assessed at the rate of 2 per cent prescribed for unclassi fied goods and not at the rate of 6 paise per rupee ie 6 prescribed in the aforesaid Notification
The respondent further claimed that ribbon being an accessory anti not a part of the typewriter its turnover could not be subjected to sales tax at the rate of 10 prescribed inter alia for typewriters and parts thereof by Notification No ST 1738X I012 1963 dated June 1 1963
The Sales Tax Officer Section IV Kanpur did not accede to the conten tions of the respondent and holding that carbon paper re mained paper even after going through certain chemical processes and that ribbon was a part of the typewriter taxed the turnover of carbon paper for the period commencing from July 1 1966 to the end of March 1967 at 6 and that of ribbon at 10
He however taxed the turnover of carbon paper for the period April 1 1966 to June 30 1966 at 2
The validity and correctness of this order in so far as it related to the levy of tax on carbon paper at 6 and ribbon at 10 was challenged by the respondent by means of the aforesaid writ petition before the High Court at Allahabad which by its aforesaid judgment and order allowed the same and quashed the levy
Hence this appeal
Appearing in support of the appeal Mr Manchanda has assailed the reasoning and approach of the High Court and has vehemently urged that carbon paper does not lose its character as paper even after being subjected to chemical processes and that ribbon is not an accessory but an essen tial part of the typewriter
We have carefully considered the submission made by Mr Manchanda but find ourselves unable to accept the same
839 It is well settled that a word which is not defined in an enactment has to be understood in its popular and commer cial sense with reference to the context in which it occurs
In Attorney General vs Winstanley 1 Lord Tenterden started as follows Now when we look at the words of an Act of Parliament which are not applied to any particular science or art we are to construe them as they are understood in common language
 In Grenfell vs Commissioners of Inland Revenue 2 Pollock J pointed out As to tile construction of the Stamp Act I think it was very properly urged that the statute is not to be construed according to the strict or technical meaning of the language contained in it but that it is to be construed in its popular sense meaning of course by the words popular sense  that sense which people conversant with the sub ject matter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it The word paper  admittedly not having been defined either in the UP Sales Tax Act 1948 or the Rules made thereunder it has tO be understood according to the afore said well established canon of construction in the sense in which persons dealing in and using the article understand it
It is therefore necessary to know what is paper as commonly or generally understood
The said word which is derived from the name of reedy plant papyrus and grows abundantly along the Nile river in Egypt is explained in The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary Volume 2 Third Edition as a substance composed of fibres interlaced into a compact web made from linen and cotton rags straw wood certain grasses etc which are macrated into a pulp dried and pressed it is used for writing
printing or drawing on for wrapping things in for covering the interior of wails etc
 In Encyclopaedia Britannica  Volume 13 15th Edition paper  has been defined as the basic material used for written communication and the dissemination of information
 In the Unabridged Edition of The Randon House Dicition ary of the English Language the word paper  has been defined as a substance made from rags straw wood  or other fibrous material usually in thin sheets used to bear writing or printing or for wrapping things decorating walls etc
 From the above definitions it is clear that in popular parlance the word paper  is understood as meaning a sub stance which is used for bearing writing or printing or for packing or for drawing on or for decorating or cover ing the walls
Now carbon paper which is manu 1 1831 2 Dow  Clark 3021901  2 at 248
840 factured by coating the tissue paper with a thermo setting ink made to a liquid consistency based mainly on wax non drying oils pigments and dyes by means of a suitable coat ing roller and equalising rod and then passing it through chilled rolls cannot be used for the aforesaid purposes but is used
according to The Randon House Dictionary of the English Language  between two sheets of plain paper in order to reproduce on the lower sheet that which is written or typed on the upper sheet ie making replicas or carbon copies cannot properly be described as paper
It will be well at this stage to refer to a few deci sions which confirm our view
In Kilburn  Co Ltd vs Commissioner of Sales Tax UP LucknowI a Bench of Allahabad High Court while examining the very same entry in the Notification with which we are concerned in the instant case and holding that Ammonia paper and ferro paper used for obtaining prints and sketches of site plans are not paper us understood generally and therefore will not come within the expression paper other than hand made paper  as used in Notification No ST 3124X 10124 dated 1st July 1966 issued under section 3 A of the UP Sales Tax Act 1948 observed  The word paper  has not been defined in the Act or the Rules and as such it has to be given the meaning which it has in ordinary parlance
Paper as understood in common parlance is the paper which is used for printing
writing and packing purposes
 In Sree Rama Trading Company vs State of Kerala2 the High Court of Kerala after a good deal of research held that cellophane is not paper coming within entry 42 in the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act 1963 as it stood at the time relevant to the year 1966 67
In State of Orissa vs Gestetner Duplicators P Ltd3 the HIgh Court of Orissa held that stencil paper was not paper within the meaning of serial No 7 A of the Schedule to the Notification issued by the State Government under the first proviso to section 51 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act 1947 and that sale of stencil paper was therefore not taxable at the rate of 7 per cent but is exigible to tax at the rate of 5 per cent
In Commissioner of Sates Tax UP vs
SN Brothers1 this Court while upholding the decision of the Allahabad High Court which held that food colours  and syrup es sences  arc edible goods while dyes and colours and compo sitions thereof and scents and perfume  did not seem prima facie to connote that they are edible goods observed 1 31 STC 625
2 28 STC 469
3 33 STC 333
4 31 STC 302 841 The words dyes and
colours  used in entry No 10 and the words scents and perfumes  used in entry No 37 have to be construed in their own context and in the sense as ordinarily understood and attribut ed to these words by people usually conver sant with and dealing in such goods
Simi larly the words food colours and syrup essences which are descriptive of the class of goods the sales of which are to be taxed under the Act have to be construed in the sense in which they are popularly understood by those who deal in them and who purchase and use them
 Bearing in mind the ratio of the above mentioned decisions it is quite clear that the mere fact that the word paper  forms part of the denomination of a specialised article is not decisive of the question whether the article is paper as generally understood the word paper  in the common parlance or in the comercial sense means paper which is used for printing writing or packing pur poses
We are therefore clear of opinion that Carbon paper is not paper as envisaged by entry 2 of the aforesaid Notification
Regarding ribbon also to which the above mentioned rule construction equally applies we have no manner of doubt that it an accessory and not a part of the typewriter unlike spool though it may not be possible to use the latter without the former
Just as aviation petrol is not a part of the aero plane nor diesel is a part of a bus in the same way ribbon is not a part of the type writer though it may not be possible to type out any matter without it
The very same question with which we are here confronted came up for decision before the High Court of Mysore in State of Mysore vs Kores IndiaLtd
1 where it was held Whether a typewriter ribbon is a part of a typewriter is to be considered in the light of what is meant by a typewriter in the commer cial sense
Typewriters are being sold in the market without the typewriter ribbons and therefore typewriter ribbon is not an essen tial part of a typewriter so as to attract tax as per entry 18 of the Second Schedule to the Mysore Sales Tax Act 1957
 For the foregoing reasons we do not find any force in this appeal which is dismissed but in the circumstances of the case without any order as to costs
MR Appeal dismissed 1 26 STC 87


Summary:
The Governor of UP issued a Notification under Section 3 A of the UP Sales Tax Act 1948 and the Sales Tax Officer Section IV Kanpur ordered the respondent company to pay tax on the turnover of  carbon paper at 6 and that of ribbon at 10 as per entry 2 of the Notification
The respondent challenged the order in a writ petition before the High Court
contending that carbon paper was not paper  with the meaning of entry 2 and its turnover was therefore to be assessed at the rate of 2 prescribed for unclassified goods and that ribbon  being an accessory and not a part of the typewriter could only be taxed at the rate of 6 and not 10
The High Court allowed the writ and quashed the levy
The appellant contended that carbon paper does not lose its character as paper in spite of being subjected to chemi cal processes and that ribbon is not an accessory but an essential part of the typewriter
Dismissing the appeal the Court HELD 1 A word which is not defined in an enactment has to be understood in its popular and commercial sense with reference to the context in which it occurs
It has to be understood according to the well established canon of construction in the sense in which persons dealing in and using the article understand it
839 A B Attorney General vs Winstanley 1831 2 Dow  Clark 3021901   and Grenfell vs Commissioner of Inland Revenue 18761 exhibit D 242 at p 248 applied
2 The word paper  is understood as meaning a sub stance which is used for bearing writing or printing or for packing
or for drawing on
or for decorating or covering the wails
Carbon paper cannot be used for these purposes but is used for making replicas or carbon copies and cannot properly be described as paper
839 G 840 A B K Kilburn  Co Ltd vs Commissioner of Sales Tax UP Lucknow 31 STC 625 Sree Rama Trading Company vs State of Kerala 28 STC 469
state of Orissa vs Gestetner Duplicators P Ltd 33 STC 333  Commissioner of Sales Tax UPv
SN Brothers 31 STC 302 applied
3 The above mentioned rule of construction equally applies to ribbon
an accessory and not a part of the typewriter though it may not be possible type out any matter without it
841 D E State of Mysore vs Kores India Ltd 26 STC 87 ap proved