Case: Ramavatar Budhai Prasad &amp; Others Vs. Assistant Sales Tax Officer Akola &amp; Another

2. The petitioners in the three petitions are dealers in betel leaves at Akola, now in the State of Maharashtra and at the relevant time in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The Assistant Sales Tax Officer at Akola assessed the petitioners under the provisions of the C. P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Act XXI of 1947), hereinafter termed the "Act" to the payment of sales tax as follows:WRIT PETITION NO.PERIODAMOUNTW. P. No. 4/587-11-53 to 26-10-54Rs. 1882- 9-0and 27-10-54 to 14-11-55Rs. 1885-13-0W. P. No. 36/5827-10-54 to 26-10-55Rs. 1890- 3-0W. P. No. 37/5827-10-54 to 14-11-55Rs. 3530- 4-0The petitioners in W. P. Nos. 4 and 36 did not appeal under s. 22 of the Act but the petitioner in W. P. No. 37 did appeal under that section. As he did not deposit the amount of tax the petition was dismissed. He then filed a petition under Art. 226 in the High Court of Nagpur but that petition was withdrawn and therefore no decision was given on the merits of the case.In all the petitions the submission of the petitioners is that the order demanding tax was without authority of law inasmuch as betel leaves were not taxable under s. 6 read with the second Sehedule of the Act. The imposition of the tax, it is alleged, is an infringement of the petitioners right to carry on trade or business guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(g) of the constitution and the prayer is for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Assistant Sales Tax Officer and for prohibition.The petitioners in the three petitions are dealers in betel leaves at Akola, now in the State of Maharashtra and at the relevant time in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The Assistant Sales Tax Officer at Akola assessed the petitioners under the provisions of the C. P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Act XXI of 1947), hereinafter termed the "Act" to the payment of sales tax as follows:WRIT PETITION NO.P. No. 4/587-11-53 to 26-10-54Rs. 1882- 9-0and 27-10-54 to 14-11-55Rs. 1885-13-0W. P. No. 36/5827-10-54 to 26-10-55Rs. 1890- 3-0W. P. No. 37/5827-10-54 to 14-11-55Rs. 3530- 4-0The petitioners in W. P. Nos. 4 and 36 did not appeal under s. 22 of the Act but the petitioner in W. P. No. 37 did appeal under that section. As he did not deposit the amount of tax the petition was dismissed. He then filed a petition under Art. 226 in the High Court of Nagpur but that petition was withdrawn and therefore no decision was given on the merits of the case.

Court's reasoning:
4. The Schedule was amended by the C. P. and Berar Sales Tax Amendment Act (Act XVI of 1948) by which item No. 36 was omitted. It is contended that in spite of this omission they were exempt from Sales Tax as they are vegetables. The intention of the legislature in regard to what is vegetables is shown by its specifying vegetables and betel leaves as separate items in the Schedule exempting articles from Sales Tax. Subsequently betel leaves were removed from the Schedule which is indicative of the legislatures intention of not exempting betel leaves from the imposition of the tax. But it was submitted that betel leaves are vegetables and therefore they would be exempt from Sales Tax under item 6. Reliance was placed on the dictionary meaning of the word "vegetable" as given in Shorter Oxford Dictionary where the word is defined as "of or pertaining to, comprised or consisting of, or derived, or obtained from plants or their parts." But this word must be construed not in any technical sense nor from the botanical point of view but as understood in common parlance. It has not been defined in the Act and being a word of everyday use it must be construed in its popular sense meaning "that sense which people conversant with the subject matter with which the statute is dealing would a tribute tothat case the word "vegetables" was construed and in our opinion correctly construed in relation to the very provisions of the Act which are now in controversy before us. In cases under the U. P. Sales Tax Act betel leaves have been held not to be within the expression "greenapart from the fact that the legislature by using two distinct and different items i. e. item 6 "vegetables" and item No. 36 "beiel leaves" has indicated its intention, decided cases also show that the word "vegetables" in taxing statutes is to be understood as in common parlance i.e. denoting class vegetables which are grown in a kitchen garden or in a farm and are used for thetable.5. In our view, betel leaves are not exempt from taxation.