LexBHARUCH COCONUT TRADING CO. AND ORS. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD AND OTHERS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c BHARUCH COCONUT tRADING CO. AND ORS. v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD AND OTHERS. NOVEMBER 27, 1990. [KULDIP SINGH AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Act/Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Rules-Rule 4 Item Nos. 10, IJ and 55-Watery coconut (brown coconut)-E/igibility to octroi. The appellants Import and sell the brown coconut (watety coconut) from the States of Andbra Pradesh, Keralil, Karnalllka llild Tamil Nadu and sell the same in the city of Ahmedabad as their tl'ading activity. Under the Municipal Corporation rules, whenever goods are D carried into or out of the octrol limlts of the Municipal Corporation, the articles specified under the rules are liable to octrol, except of course those exempted under Item 10 of Rnle 4. The respondents leVled octroi "n brown coconuts at the rate of Rs. I per 100 kgm, at the point ot import into the octroi limits of the Respondent's corporation. 'I'he rate· was later enhanced to Rs.5 per 100 kg. The appellants challenged tlie levy of octroi on brown coconuts by means of filing ii writ petition E contending that brown coconuts are green fruits within the meanlnll ot item 10 of rule 4 of the RUies and therefore, they are exempted article&, not exigible to octroi. The High Court rejected the writ petition. 11ellce this appeal, by special leave. F Dismissing the appeal, this Court, HELD: The watery coconut (brown eoconut) is not a green l'rult but is a separate entity by itself. it cannot also be considered to be a dry fruit within the meaning of entry 11 of Rule 4. Dried fruit is distinct from the coconut. Therefore, the watery coconut (brown cocenilt) does not fall within the meaning of item 13B of Rule 4 of the Rules also. All G articles or goods which are not specified elsewhere in tbe schedule or in the list of exempted articles or goods would fall under item 55 of Rule 14. Brown coconut is not an exempted article among the list of artlcles in item 10 of Rule, namely, green fruit Brown coconut (watery coconut) would fall within item 55 of Rule 14 of the Rules and is exlglble to H octroi. [397D-E] 392 - COCONUT TRADING CO. v. MUNICIPALCORPN. [K. RAMASWAMY.J.] 393 Ramavtar Budhaiprasad v. Asstt. Sales Tax Officer, Ako/a, [1961l 12 STC 286; Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. S.N. Brothers, [1973] 31 STC 302; P.S. Thillai Chidambara Nadar v. Addi. Appellate Asstt. Commr., Madurai and Anr., [1985] 60 STC 80; Sri Krishna Coconut Co. v. Commercial Tax Officer, Ama/apuram, [1965) 16 STC 511; Kunchi Rajeshwara Sastry and Sons and Anr. v. Asstt. Commis- sioner of Commercial Taxes, Kakinada and Ors., [1976] 37 STC 399; Sri Lakshmi Coconut Industries v. The State of Karnataka and Anr., [1980] 46 STC 404; Deputy Commissioner of Agrl. Income Tax and Sales Tax, Kera/av. A.P. Raman, [1960] 11 STC 263 and Commis- sioner of Sales-tax v. Ram Kumar Nand Kumar, [1973) 31 STC 321, referred to. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2433 of 1977. From the Judgment and Order dated 24.1.1977 of the Gujarat High Court in S.C.A. No. 655 of 1975. Kishan Kumar for Mehta Dave & Co. for the appellants. H.S. Parihar for the respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. RAMASWAMY, J. This appeal under Art. 136 is against the judgment in S.C.A. No. 655 of 1975 of the Gujarat High Court dated January 24, 1977 wherein the appellants questioned the power to levy octroi on brown coconut (watery coconut) and the High Court dismis- sed the writ petition holding that the brown coconut is not an exemp- A B c D E ted green fruit but would attract general item No. 55 of Rule 14 of the F Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Octroi Rules (for short 'the Rules'),. The admitted facts are that the appellants import and sell the brown coconut in the city of Ahmedabad as their trading activity. The respondent levied octroi on brown coconurs at the rate of Re:i per-100 kilograms at the point of import into the octroi limits of the respondent corporation. By an amendment to the rules, with effect from April 6, G 1975 the rate of levy was increased to Rs.5 per 100 kilograms. The appellants challenged its legality contending that the brown coconuts are green fruits within the meaning of item 10 of rule 4 of the rules and, therefore, they are exempted articles. It is, thereby, not exigible to octroi. The contention was negated and the writ petition was dismissed as against which this appeal has b
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.