1. In this Sales Tax Appeal preferred against the order made by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under S. 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the following question of law arises for consideration:—

“Whether water colour and poster coluor fall under Entry No. 97 of the Second Schedule of the Act which Entry reads — ‘Paints, Colours, dyes and varnish.”?

2. The petitioner is a dealer in stationery articles viz., Thermos-flask, razors, cosmetics, water colour, poster colour oil colour, edible oil etc., For the assessment year 1971-1972, the taxable turn over of the assessee was fixed at Rs. 3,29,472-09 P. The dispute was in respect of tax payable on the turn over of the poster colour and water colour amounting to Rs. 60,358. The assessing authority, after examining the books of accounts, issued a proposition notice in form No. 31A to the assessee. The relevant portion of the notice reads thus:—

“You have sold water colour, oil colour, creylin colour etc., but have treated the sales as subject to sales tax at the rate of 3% only. You have made these purchases from Camlin Private Ltd., Bombay, on the strength of ‘C’ forms and the total purchases are at Rs. 56,409-28 during the year 1971-1972. Since you have mixed up these sales along with stationery sales, the sale value is estimated at Rs. 60,358/- by adding G.P at 7% to the total purchases value and this turnover of Rs. 60,358/- is proposed to be added back to the total turnover shown subject to the S.T at the rate of 6%. Therefore, I propose to compute the turnover as shown below:—”

3. As can be seen from the proposition notice, the assessing officer proposed to levy sales tax at the rate of 6%. This was on the ground that the water colour and poster colour sold by the assessee fall within Entry 97 in Second Schedule of the Act on which, the rate of tax prescribed was at 6 per cent. The assessee objected to the aforesaid notice as per his reply dated 21-9-1973. He stated as follows:—

“With reference to the above, I desire to state that I am dealing in stationery goods and water colour, crylin colour etc. These colours fall in the category of stationery goods. Hence, I have paid the tax at the rate 3% only. But you have proposed to levy tax at 6%. It may not be out of place, if I bring to your notice that all the dealers are doing business in similar colours and paying only 3% tax. I fail to understand how the sales of colours are liable to tax at 6%. I have no other objection in the matter.”

4. The assessing authority did not accept the plea of the assessee. He proceeded to levy tax at 6 per cent and completed the assessment on that basis. Against the assessment orders, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) Bangalore. The appellate authority accepted the contention of the assessee that water colour, poster colour etc., dealt with by the assessee would not fall under Entry 97 of the second schedule. On the said view, he set aside the order of the assessing officer.

5. Thereafter, the Commissioner having perused the order of the appellate authority, was of the view that the view taken by the appellate authority was erroneous and was prejudicial to the revenue. He therefore issued a notice under S. 22A of the Act to the assessee calling upon him to show cause why the order of the appellate authority should not be revised. The assessee filed his objections to the show cause notice and reiterated his stand which he had taken before the assessing officer and which had been accepted by the appellate authority. The Commissioner, however, proceeded to hold that the water, colour, oil colour and poster colour dealt with by the assessee fell within Entry 97 of the second Schedule viz., ‘Paints, colours, dyes, and varnish’. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee has presented this appeal.

6. The contention urged for the assessee is that the words ‘Paints, colours, dyes and varnish’ used in Entry 97 only contemplate ‘paints and colours’ used for surface painting or coating of walls and furniture and the word ‘dyes’ only means colours used for dying textile goods, but the water colour, oli colour and poster colour which the assessee has been dealing are entirely different goods as understood at common parlance and they are meant for use by students and artists. It is well settled that the words used in the entries in the sales tax laws should be understood by the meaning attached to those words at common parlance i.e, by persons dealing in those goods and persons using those articles; and the technical meaning attached to those words and given in Dictionaries could not be a safe guide for arriving at a correct conclusion. In the present case, the words used in Entry 97 of the second Schedule are as follows:—

“Paints, colours, dyes and varnish”. The tax payable on these items is fixed at 6 per cent. If the water colour poster colour and oil colour in which the assessee was dealing, come within Entry 97, the assessee was required to pay tax at 6 per cent. If those articles are not included in the aforesaid entry, then the tax payable is only at 3 per cent under S. 5(1) of the Act. As explained by the assessee, he is a dealer in stationery articles including water colour, poster colour and oil colour which are mostly used by Engineering and drawing students and can popularly be described as drawing materials. Though, according to the dictionary meaning, water colour, poster colour and oil colour sold by the assessee fall within the meaning of the word ‘colour’ the said meaning cannot straightaway be considered as appropriate for understanding the word colour used in Entry 97. At common parlance, paints, colours and varnish are understood as those which are used for surface painting or coating of walls, doors, furniture and metallic bodies such as oil paints plastic emulsion, distemper and the like. These are mostly used in construction of houses and are generally dealt with by hard-ware and or paints merchants. From the facts of this case, it is clear the assessee is a stationery merchant and most of the articles he is dealing are those required by the students. Therefore, water colour, oil colour and poster colour in which the assessee is dealing cannot reasonably be considered as falling within Entry 97 of the second Schedule. We receive support for the above view from the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P v. S.N Brothers(1). In the said case, the question for consideration, was whether ‘food colour’ fell within the entry ‘dyes and colours and compositions thereof’ and whether ‘syrup essences’ fell within the entry ‘scents and perfumes’. In the said decision, the Supreme Court pointed out that the meaning given to the words in a dictionary cannot serve as a safe guide in construing the words used in the list of articles for the purpose of levying sales tax. The Supreme Court pointed out that dictionary gives all the different shades of meaning attributable to a word, but that is hardly helpful in solving the problem raised in a controversy of this type. Thereafter the Supreme Court observed as follows:—

“The words ‘dyes and colours’ used in entry No. 10 and the words ‘scents and perfumes’ used in entry No. 37 have to be construed in their own context and in the sense as ordinarily understood and attributed to these words by people usually conversant with and dealing in such goods. Similarly, the words “food colours” and “syrup essences”, which are descriptive of the class of goods the sales of which are to be taxed under the Act, have to be construed in the sense in which they are popularly understood by those who deal in them and who purchase and use them.”

7. Applying the above principle, the Supreme Court concluded as follows:—

“Food colours” and ‘Syrup essences’ being themselves known articles of common use, the question arises whether the words and expressions used in entries 10 and 37 of the List are intended to take within their fold goods popularly known in common parlance by the names of food colours and ‘syrup essences’.”

“It cannot be gainsaid that ‘food colours’ and ‘syrup essences’ are edible goods whereas ‘dyes and colours and compositions thereof’ and scents and perfumes' as specified in entries Nos. 10 and 37 of the List do not seem prima facie to connote that they are edible goods. This is the reasoning of the High Court and it appears to us to be both logical and rational. Indeed, except for items like salt’ in entry No. 34 the ‘sugar manufactured by mills’ (entry No. 40) and ‘vanaspati, including refined coconut oil’ (entry No. 43), which is capable of being used as medium for cooking and prima facie edible, there does not seem to be any other edible article included in the List. Item No. 25 speaks of ‘oils of all kinds other than edible oils manufactured on ghanis by human or animal power’. This scheme suggests that, apart from the undoubted edible goods, in cases where the import of the specified goods is wide enough to include both edible and non-edible category then the intention has been clearly expressed whether or not to include edible goods. Now in the case of - entries Nos. 10 and 37 we are inclined to think in agreement with the High Court that these entries are not intended to extend to edible colours like food colours and to edible essences like syrup essences. It would indeed be straining the meanings of the words and expressions in those entries as understood in popular commercial sense to include edible colours and essences. If the intention of the State Government was to include food colours in entry No. 10 and syrup essences in entry No. 37 then in our view these goods could easily have been specified by their own popularly known description. In any event, assuming that another view as to the meaning of these entries is possible, we have not been persuaded to hold that the view taken by the High Court is so grossly erroneous that we should interfere on special leave appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution.”

8. In our view, the Deputy Commissioner was right in coming to the conclusion that at common parlance, the dealers in articles viz., water colour, poster colour and oil colour considered them as drawing materials used by Engineering students and artists and not being goods dealt with by hardware and or paints merchants and cannot be considered as falling within Entry No. 97 of the second Schedule. The subsequent amendment made to Entry No. 97 by Act No. 18 of ??? supports the view which we have taken. By the said amendment for the words ‘and varnish’ in entry No. 97 the following words are substituted:—

“varnishes, pigments, polishes, indio, enamel, putty, bale oil, white oil, turpentine, thinners, primers and paint brushes”.

9. It is also settled rule of interpretation that Legislative exposition as revealed by subsequent amendments made by the Legislature can be used as a guide for interpreting the provisions as it stood before amendment. (See S.V.P Cement Co. v. G.M.S Ltd.(2). The above amendment reinforces the view that the goods included at Entry No. 97 are those normally dealt with by hardware and or paints merchants which are used for surface paintings of walls, doors, furniture etc., and do not comprehend colours used by students and artists, dealt with by a stationer.

10. For the reasons aforesaid, we make the following order:—

The appeal is allowed, the order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated 4th June, 1976 is set aside and that of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) is restored.