M/s. Motipur Zamindary Co. (Private) Ltd. v. State of Bihar
AIR 1962 SC 660 — Sugarcane is not “green vegetables”; producer is a “dealer” under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947.
```ms-motipur-zamindary-co-private-ltd-v-state-of-bihar
Quick Summary
The Supreme Court held that sugarcane is not “green vegetables” under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947. The word “vegetable” must be read in common speech—things grown for the table. Sugarcane is a grass grown for sugar, so no exemption. The appellant, a sugarcane producer, was also a dealer under Section 2(c). Appeals and writs failed.
Issues
- Does sugarcane fall within “green vegetables” in the exemption notification under Section 6?
- Is the producer of sugarcane a dealer within Section 2(c) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947?
Rules
- The term “vegetable” in taxing laws is read in common parlance: items grown in a kitchen garden or farm and used for the table.
- Section 2(c) defines dealer widely; producers who sell their produce may be covered.
Facts (Timeline)
Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947
- Govt. notification under Section 6 exempted “green vegetables other than potatoes” (except when sold in sealed containers).
- The appellant, a producer of sugarcane, was assessed to sales tax.
- He claimed sugarcane was a green vegetable and claimed exemption; he also said he was not a dealer under Section 2(c).
- Authorities held sugarcane is not a green vegetable; assessment sustained.
- Matter reached the Supreme Court via special leave.
Arguments
Appellant
- Sugarcane = green vegetable in the exemption entry.
- Being a producer, he was not a dealer under Section 2(c).
Respondent (State)
- Common usage shows sugarcane is a grass grown for sugar, not a table vegetable.
- Definition of dealer is wide; appellant is covered.
Judgment (Held)
The Supreme Court held that sugarcane is not a “green vegetable”. The Court used the common-parlance test. Dictionaries (Webster and Oxford) also describe sugarcane as a tall grass grown for sugar. Hence, the exemption does not apply.
The Court further held that the appellant is a dealer within Section 2(c). The wording is wide and covers his activities. Appeals and Article 32 petitions were dismissed with costs.
Ratio Decidendi
- Common-parlance governs: “Vegetable” means food items grown for the table; sugarcane does not fit.
- Dictionary support: Sugarcane is a grass; not a table vegetable.
- Dealer definition is broad: Producers who sell produce may be dealers.
Why It Matters
The case clarifies how to read everyday words in tax laws. Courts ask: How do people normally use the word? It also confirms that producer-sellers can be treated as dealers for sales tax.
Key Takeaways
- Sugarcane is not a “green vegetable.”
- Common-parlance test applies to everyday words in tax entries.
- Producers selling goods may be dealers under wide definitions.
- Appeals and writs were dismissed with costs.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “Table, Not Cane”
- Table — Vegetables are for the table.
- Not — Sugarcane is not a table vegetable.
- Cane — It’s a grass for sugar; no exemption.
IRAC Outline
Issue: Whether sugarcane is “green vegetables” for exemption; whether the producer is a dealer.
Rule: Common-parlance meaning of “vegetable”; Section 2(c) definition of “dealer”.
Application: Sugarcane is known as a grass grown for sugar, not for the dining table; producer’s selling activity fits the dealer definition.
Conclusion: No exemption; producer is a dealer; matters dismissed with costs.
Glossary
- Common-Parlance Test
- Courts read ordinary words as common people use them, not in technical or botanical senses.
- Dealer (S.2(c))
- A person who carries on the business of selling goods; the term is drafted widely.
- Exemption Entry
- A notification or schedule item that removes certain goods from tax.
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now