THE CENTRAL INDIA SPINNING AND WEAVING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED, THE EMPRESS MILLS, NAGPUR versus THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, WARDHA

Citation: [1958] 1 S.C.R. 1102 · Decided: 18-12-1957 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: NATWARLAL HARILAL BHAGWATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

110.2 
SUl'RElVIE COURT REPOR'l.'S 
(1958) 
~~ 
1967 
1 7, 1951, purporting to dismiss the appellant from service was 
Kkem Oha>Ui 
inoperative and tha.t the appellant was a member of the scr-
v. 
vice at the date of the institution of the suit out of which this 
Th, Union~ India appeal has arisen. The appellant wi!I get costs throughout in 
and 0 er• 
all courts. He must pay all court foes that may be due from 
Da• o. J. 
him. Under order XIV, Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules 
were direct that !he appellants could be paid his fees which we 
assess at Rs. 250. 
1961 
Deumber, 1.S 
Appeal allowed. 
THE CENTRAL INDIA SPINNING AND WEAVING 
AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LIMITED, 
THE EMPRESS MILLS, NAGPUR 
v. 
THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, WARDHA 
(BH,\GWATI, 
13. P. SINHA, JAFER IMAM, J. L. KAPUR and 
GAJENDRAGADKAR JJ.) 
Terminal tax-Goods in transit passing through Municipal 
limits-If can be taxed-Impo~'.ed into and exported from-
Connotation of-C. P. & Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 (C.P. II 
of 1922). s. 66(1)(0). 
Section 66(I)(o) of the C.P. and Berar Municipalities Act, 
1922, empowered the municipalities to impose "a terminal tax 
on goods or animals imported into or exported from the limits 
of a municipality". The respondent framed rules for the impo-
sition of terminal tax. The appellant transported bales of cot-
ton from Yeotmal to Nagpur by road and the vehicles carrying 
the goods passed through the limits of respondent municipality. 
The goods were neither unloaded nor reloaded at Wardha but 
\Vere merely carried across through the munic~pal area. The 
respondent 
col1ected 
terminal tax on these 
goods on the 
ground that they were exported by the appellant from the 
limits of the respondent municipality. The appellant disputed 
his liability to pay terminal tax, and claimed a refund: 
Held, that the goods which were in 
transit and were 
merely carried pcross the limits of the municipality were not 
liatle to terminal tax. Terminal tax on goods imported into 
or exported from the limit~ of a municipality was payable on 
goods on their journey ending within 1hc municipal limits or 
commencjng therefrom and not where the goods were merely 
• 
S.C.R 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
1103 
in transi.t and that their terminus elsewhere. Terminal tax levj, 
196'1 
able under s. 66(!)(0) must have reference to some activity 
within the municipal area i.e .. the entry for the. purpose of re- The Central Iniia 
Spinning and 
maining within that area or the commencement of the jounrey 
Weaaingand 
from that area. 
Manufacturing 
. 
. 
,, 
l 
"b . 
. 
Company, LimKetl, 
The words "imported mto do not mere Y mean 
rmgmg Tiie Empress Mills 
into" but comprise something more i.e., incorporating and mix-
Nagpur 
' 
ing up of the goods with the mass of the property in the local 
v. 
area. Similarly, the words "exported from" do not merely in-
The Municipal 
dicate "taking out" but have reference to the taking out of Oommi~ Wartlha 
goods which had become part and parcel of the mass of the 
property of the local area and will not apply to goods in transit 
i.e. brought into the area for the purpose of being transported 
out of it. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JuRISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 119 
of 1953. 
Appeal by special leave from the order dated September 
11, 1950, of the Nagpur High Court in Miscellaneous Civil 
Case No.· 77 of 1946. 
C. K. Daphtary, Solicitor-General of India and M. S. K. 
Sastri, for the appellants. 
A. V. Vishwanatha Sastri, G. J. Ghate and Naunit Lal, 
for the respondent. 
1957. December 18. The following Judgment of the 
Court was delivered by 
KAPUR J.-This is an appeal by Special Leave against 
a judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at 
Nagpur dated February 14, 1950 and the question for deci-
sion turns upon the construction of s. 66(1)(0) of the C.P. & 
Berar Municipalities Act (Act II of 1922) which in this 
judgment will be termed the Act. 
A short recital of the facts· of the case will suffice for its 
decision. 
The appellant is a company which. has its spin-
ning and weaving mills at Yeotmal. The appellant's bales of 
cotton are transported from Yeotmal to Nagpur by road 
and vehicles carrying them pass through the limits of Wardha 
Municipality. The goods being in transit, the vehicles carry-
ing them do no more than use the road which traverses the 
municipal limits of Wardha a,nd is a P.W.D. road. The goods 
are neither unloaded nor reloaded at Wardha but are merely 
KapurJ. 
1104 
SUPREME COURT

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