Abraham vs Asst. Sales Tax Officer, Alwaye on 25 February, 1960

0
42
Kerala High Court
Abraham vs Asst. Sales Tax Officer, Alwaye on 25 February, 1960
Equivalent citations: AIR 1960 Ker 360, 1960 11 STC 291 Ker
Author: P R Nayar
Bench: P R Nayar

ORDER

P.T. Raman Nayar, J.

1. There can be no doubt that animals and birds in captivity (monkeys, minahs and parrots, in these cases) are moveable property, and they are therefore “goods” as that word is defined in Section 2(d) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Hence the sale of such things is liable to taxation under that Act. The argument that animate things wilt not come within the definition of “goods'” in Article 366 (12) of the Constitution does not carry the petitioners far even if it is well-founded. Assuming it to be well founded, the sale of such things will not fall within entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule or entry 92A of List I. It would therefore fall within entry 97 of List I and to provide for the levy of a tax on such sales would be within the competence of Parliament.

2. I dismiss the petitions.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here