M. Jafar A. Majid, Varanasi Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Lucknow - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
.....claimed exemption under notification - exemption was provided to yarn of all kinds including un spun fibre used in weaving - whether woolen carpet yarn or 'kati' which was un spun fibre was used in weaving within contemplation of notification - apex court held, woolen 'kati' was neither yarn nor un spun fibre used in weaving and was not exempted from tax. - code of criminal procedure, 1973 [c.a. no. 2/1974]. section 320: [tarun chatterjee& h.s. bedi, jj] compounding of offences - personal disputes compromise in the instant case application was filed for quashing of fir under various sections including section 406 i.p.c., on account of the compromise entered into between the complainant and the accused. it was rejected on the ground that section 406 was not compoundable as the..........under a notification dated 1-2-1968; the exemption is provided to yarn of all kinds, including un spun fibre used in weaving, other than, among others, woollen carpet yarn. this court, in the judgment aforementioned, was concerned with other notifications that referred to yarn of all kinds, including un spun fibres used in weaving. the question this court addressed itself to was whether woollen carpet yarn or 'kati', which was admittedly un spun fibre was used in weaving within the contemplation of those notifications. the concept of weaving was considered and the court then addressed itself to determining whether the process by which the woollen carpet 'kati' was used in the preparation of carpets could properly be called 'weaving', the facts found, on the basis of evidence, by the.....

Judgment:
ORDER

1. We are concerned in these appeals against the judgment of the High Court at Allahabad related to the Assessment Years 1963-64, 1965-66, 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73. The issue relates to assessment for the purposes of sales tax of un spun woollen carpet yarn or 'Kati'. The High Court placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in CST v. Sarin Textiles Mills, : AIR1975SC1262 to hold that 'Kati' was not exempt from tax.

2. In the present case, the appellant-assessee claims exemption under a notification dated 1-2-1968; the exemption is provided to yarn of all kinds, including un spun fibre used in weaving, other than, among others, woollen carpet yarn. This Court, in the judgment aforementioned, was concerned with other notifications that referred to yarn of all kinds, including un spun fibres used in weaving. The question this Court addressed itself to was whether woollen carpet yarn or 'Kati', which was admittedly un spun fibre was used in weaving within the contemplation of those notifications. The concept of weaving was considered and the Court then addressed itself to determining whether the process by which the woollen carpet 'Kati' was used in the preparation of carpets could properly be called 'weaving', The facts found, on the basis of evidence, by the Appellate Commissioner and the revisional authority were referred to and on this foundation, this Court found the conclusion inescapable that woollen 'Kati' was neither yarn nor un spun fibre used in weaving.

3. In the instant case, there is no finding of fact arrived at by the revisional authority that is notably different from that referred to in the said judgment, except that the 'Kati' here is of greater length. It is difficult, in this situation, to hold that a different approach is required. Following the said judgment, therefore, the appeals are dismissed, with no order as to costs.