LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
βš–οΈ Ask the AI about your situation:πŸš— Car AccidentπŸ’Ό Work / Job🏠 Housing / EvictionπŸ‘ͺ Family / DivorceπŸ“‹ Contract DisputeπŸ’° Money Owed

M/S. PARLE BISCUITS (P) LTD. versus THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 954 · Decided: 15-12-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
MIS. PARLE BISCUITS (P) LTD. 
v. 
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. 
DECEMBER 15, 2004 
[ARIJIT PASAYAT AND C.K. THAKKER, JJ.] 
Bihar Finance Act, 1981 : Sections 13(1) and 21(1) (as amended by 
Amendment Act, 1985). 
Sales Tax-Packing material-Concessional rate of tax in respect of-
C Scope of Notification No. S.O. 154 dated 28.1.1985-Packing material made 
out ofpaper~Exclusion of-Company engaged in manufacture of biscuits-
Jts predecessor company given the benefit of concessional rate of sales tax 
on purchase of cardboard (corrugated) boxes used for packing biscuits-
However, it was denied the benefit of concessional rate of tax in respect 
D of cardboard boxes and asked to pay 10% tax in view of Amendment Act 
of 1985-Writ petition filed contending that what was excluded in the 1 
Notification was 'cardboard' and not 'cardboard boxes '-High Court held 
that packing material made out of paper was not eligible for concessional 
rate of tax-Correctness of-Held : In a taxing statute there is no room 
for any intendment and regard must be had to the clear meaning of the 
E words-The entire matter is wholly governed by the language of theΒ· 
Notification-The effect of the Notification has not been taken away by the 
amendment of S. 13(1) by the Amendment Act, 1985-There cannot be an 
universal application of rigid standard for determining the question whether 
'carton' would include 'crdboard box '-Hence, matter remitted to Deputy 
F Commissioner of Sales Tax to determine the said question. 
Interpretation of Statutes : 
"Amendment" and "repeal"-Distinction between-Held: There is no 
real distinction between amendment and repeal-When a statutory provision 
G is amended to a limited or a small extent then it is termed as amendment, 
and when the provision is extensively amended then it is called repeal-
After repeal there is a reenactment to the law. 
Words & Phras.es : 
H 
"Paper", "carton", "cardboard" and "cardboard box"-Meaning of 
954 
--
PARLE BISCUIT (P) LTD. v. ST ATE 
955 
The appellant-company was engaged in the manufacture of biscuits A 
and its predecessor was given the benefit of concessional rate of sales 
tax on purchase of cardboard/corrugated boxes used for packing bis-
cuits. The benefit of concessional rate of sales tax was given under 
Section 13(1) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. However, the appellant 
was denied this benefit and was asked to pay sales tax @ 10% or 
purchase of cardboard corrugated boxes in view of Notification No. S.O. 
154 dated 28.1.1985 and insertion of S. 13(l)(e) in the Act by the Bihar 
Finance Amendment Act, 1985. 
The appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court contend-
B 
ing that what was excluded by the Notification was "cardboard" and not C 
"cardboard box". The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding 
the packing material made out of paper was not eligible for concessional 
rate of sales tax. Hence the appeal. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. Description of the goods as indicated in Serial No. 12 
of the Notification No. S.O. 154 dated 28.1.1985 relates to "papl!r (of all 
kinds)" and the inclusive definition in clear terms refers to certain paper 
products like "cardboard" and "cartons". Had it been the intention to 
cover paper products of all kinds in the expression "paper" there was 
no necessity for including definite paper products. (964-F) 
2. In popular parlance the words "paper" is understood as meaning 
a substance which is used for bearing writing or printing, or for packing 
or for drawing on, or for decorating, or covering walls. [965-G) 
State of U.P. v. Kores India Limited, (1997) 39 STC 8, relied on. 
Parameswar Lal Bihani v. Commercial Tax Officer, [2000) 9 SCC 
259; State of Kera/av. V. Padmanabhan, [2000) 9 SCC 262 and Card 
Board Products v. State of Bihar, (1989) 73 STC 438, referred to. 
Chamber's Distionary, Oxford Dictionary. Webster's Dictionary. En-
cyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 13, 15th" Edn. Random House Dictionary 
(Unabridged Edition). Oxford Advanced Learners' Dictionary, 6th Edn. p. 
917, McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology Vol. 13 p. 75 and 
The Encyclopedia Americana, International Edition p. 261, referred to. 
D 
I.β€’ 
E 
F 
G 
H 
956 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2004) SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A 
3. It is well established that in a taxing statute there is no room for , 
any intendment and regard must be had to the clear meaning of the 
words. The entire matter is governed wholly by the language of a 
notifi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.