STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC. versus THE CENTRAL PROVINCES MANGANESE ORE CO. LTD.

Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 1002 · Decided: 29-10-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
1002 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC. 
v. 
THE CENTRAL PROVINCES MANGANESE ORE CO. LTD. 
October 29, 1976 
[A. N. RAY, c. J., M. H. BEG AND P. N. SHINGHAL, JJ.] 
Sales Tax-Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, s. 2(g), Expln. 
11-Goods within State at the time of contract of sale, mixed up outside State 
and the mixture sold-"Sale' if taxable. 
.
Inte1:pretation of Statutes-Provision in Act substituted by a11other--A~tnd­
i11g provision void-Effect. 
Words and Plzrases-'Substit11ted; meaning of. 
Section 2(g) 
of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax 
Act~ 1947 
defines 'sale' and Explanation II to the sub-section provides that notwithstanding 
anything to the contrary in the Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the sale ot any 
goods which are actually in the State at the time when the contract of sale, as 
defined in that Act in respect thereof is made, shall, wherever the contract of 
sale is made, be deemed for the purpose of this Act to have taken place in the 
State. 
The Amending Act of 1949 substituted for this 
Explanation 
another 
Explanation but as the amendment did not receive the assent of the Governor-
General under S. 107 of the Government of India Act, 1935, it was void. 
The assessee owned manganese ore mines in the State and was entering into 
contracts at places outside the State for the despatch abroad of manganese ore 
through different ports. 
The contracts contained specifications of strengths of 
manganese ore to he supplied with permissible percentages of other ingredients 
an admixtures. 
The assessee arranged for the transport of various grades of 
menganese ore in railway wagons from one or more of the mines, and the order 
in which trucks were loaded and unloaded was so arranged that the required 
average consistency or strength of manganese ore specified in the contracts was 
obtained in the course of such ·unloading. The assessee described the particular 
type of conglomerate as 'Oriental mixture.' 
The assessee contended (1) that the original Explanation II was validly re-
pealed by the Amending Act and since no substitution of the n~w provision had 
taken place, only the repeal survived, and that, therefore neither the old un-
amended provision nor its replacement were in operation, with the result that 
the Sales after the date of amendment were· not subject to sales tax, and (2) 
even assuming that the unamended provision was in force, 'Oriental Mixture', 
as a taxable commodity came into existence only after the ores got mixed up 
in the process of unloading and not before so that, its sale could not be taxed 
as 'goods which are actually in the State', 
at the time when contracts were 
entered into. 
i' •: I•:.- . i 
The High Court on a reference held 'the first ~ontention against the assessee 
and the second in favour of the assessee. 
Both sides appealed to this Court. 
t
G 
Dismissing the appeals of the assessee and allowing ti:e appeals: of the 
H 
State. 
HELD : (1) As the period involved is preconslitution period, Art. 286 of 
Constitution, which is not retrospective in operation would not help the assessee 
even though the assessment was after the Constitution came into force. [1007 Fl 
(2) There was no repeal of the existing Explanation when 'substitntion' by 
means of the amending Act failed to he effective and so the sale could be taxed 
under it. [1012 A-BJ 
(a) The question is one of gathering the intent from the use of words in the 
.. 
enacting provisions seen in the light of the procedure gone through, and from 
j 
the nature of the action of the authority which functions. [1010 BJ 
I 
"·. 
MAHARASHTRA V. C. P. MANGANESE (Beg, J.) 
1003 
(b) The word 'substitution' does not necessarily or always 
connote two 
A 
severable steps, one of repeal and another of· a fresh enactment, even if it 
implies two steps. The natural meaning of the word 'substit!ltion' is to i~dic.ate 
that the process cannot be so split up. If the process descnbed as substttution 
fails, 
it is totally ineffective so as to leave in tact what was sought to be dis-
placed. It could not be inferred tha~ what was intended was that in case the 
substitution failed or proved ineffe~tive, some repeal, not mentioned at ~II, was 
brought ab0ut and remained effecUve so as td create what may be described as 
a vacuum in the statutory law on the subject-matter. 
The term 'substitution' 
B 
when it occurs without anything else in the language used or in the context of 
it or in the surr

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