http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10  

PETITIONER: BENGAL IRON CORPORATION AND ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT27/04/1993

BENCH: JEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J) BENCH: JEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J) VENKATACHALA N. (J)

CITATION:  1993 AIR 2414            1993 SCR  (3) 433  1994 SCC  Supl.  (1) 310 JT 1993 (3)   134  1993 SCALE  (2)702

ACT: % Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957: Sub  item  (i) of Item No. 2 of the  Third  Schedule-Whether includes cast iron castings. Interpretative  circulars issued by Government on  statutory provisions-Legal   effect  of  if  in  derogation   of   the provisions of the Act.

HEADNOTE: Section  6  of-Andhra Pradesh General Sales  Tax  Act,  1957 provides  a  single  point  tax @ 4  %  on  declared  goods, mentioned  in the Third Schedule to that Act.  Item  (2)  of the  Third  Schedule describes the articles made of  Iron  & steel  which fall in the category of ’declared goods’;  sub- item  (i)  of Item (2) pertains to "pig iron and  cast  iron including ingot moulds, bottom plates, iron scrap, cast iron scrap,  runner scrap and iron skill scrap".  ’Cast iron’  is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as "a hard alloy of iron,  carbon  and silicon cast in a  mould".   On  February 28,1977  the Department of Revenue & Banking (Revenue  Wing) Government of India issued a letter to all Finance/  Revenue Secretaries of all State Governments and Union  Territories, explaining the term ’Cast Iron’ mentioned in section 14 (iv) (i) of the Central Sales Tax Act 1956.  This letter said  to have  been  issued  in  consultation  with  the  Directorate General  of  Technical Development,_Chief  Chemist  and  the Ministry  of  Law, Justice & Company Affairs,  extended  the scope  of  the expression ’cast iron’ to "cover  ’cast  iron casting’ also". Based  on similar clarifications, the Department of  Revenue (S) Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued  a clarificatory order under s. 42(2) of the Act vide GOMs  No. 383   dated  April  17,1985  extending  the  scope  of   the expression  ’cast  iron’ to include  "cast  iron  castings". This  order  was  also published  in  the  State’s  official Gazette.   Section  42  (2) of A.P. General  Sales  Tax  Act empowers  the  State Government to make, by an  order,  such provisions as appear to them necessary & expedient to remove difficulty in the implementation of this Act, provided  that these are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 10  

The appellant manufactures and sells products like cast iron pipes,man- 434 hole  covers,  etc.   He claims that  read  with  the  above clarificatory orders, he is liable to pay only 4% sales  Tax under  Section 6 of the A.P. General Sales Tax ct  But,  for the  assessment  year  1989-90 the  Commercial  Tax  Officer C.T.O.)  Narayanaguda Circle, Hyderabad levied Sales Tax  on the  said products at the rate applicable to general  goods. The  C.T.O.  having overruled the  appellant’s  contentions, the.  latter appealed to the Appellate Deputy  Commissioner. During  the  pendency of appeal a notice was issued  to  the appellant calling upon him to pay the tax assessed, since no stay  has been granted in appeal.  Against this  notice  the appellant filed a writ petition No. 9315 of 1992 in the High Court  of  Andhra Pradesh.  The Division Bench of  the  High Court  rejected  the appellant’s main  contention  that  his products  were covered by Item (2) (i)of the Third  Schedule to  the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, and dismissed  the  writ petition.   Vide  Civil Appeal No. 4474 of 1992  (with  Writ Petition(Civil)  No. 763 of 1992).  The appellant  questions before this Court the above view of the High Court. Rejecting  the  appellant’s contentions  and  upholding  the judgment and order of the High Court, this Court, HELD:     Law is what is declared by this Court and the High Court.  An executive authority can, at best, only opine  its own  understanding  of  the statute;  such  opinion  is  not binding   upon   the  quasi-judicial  functioning   of   the authorities under the Act. (444-B) Sanjeev  Coke  Manufacturing Company v. M/s  Bharat  Cooking Coal lid. and another, AIR 1983 SC 239, referred to. The  Government cannot use the powers, conferred by  section 42 (2) of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, to dispense with a levy created by the Act. (444D) The  Van  Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopaedia  treats  ’cast iron’  ’and  cast-iron’  (with a hyphen)  as  two  different words.   The  Act speaks of ’cast iron’ (that is  without  a hyphen between the two words) (437-G-H) Hence,  the  expression ’castiron’in Item (2)  (i)  of  A.P. General  Sales Tax Act does not include the  products  cast- iron pipes, man-hole covers, bends etc. (437-F) Deccan  Engineers  v. State of Andhra Pradesh. 1991  Vo.  12 A.P. Sales Tax   Journal 138 referred to.  435

JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4474 of 1992. From  the Judgment and order dated 28.7.1992 of  the  Andhra Pradesh High Court in W.P. No. 9315 of 1992.                           WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 763 OF 1992. (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) A.K.  Ganguli,  Rakesh  K. Khanna for  R.P.  Singh  for  the Appellant/ Petitioners. C.   Sitaramiah,   Ms.   Pushpa  Reddy   and   Mrs.   T.V.S. Narasimhachari for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B.P. JEEVAN REDDY.  J. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4474 OF 1992. The  appellant  is engaged in the manufacture  and  sale  of products  like cast iron pipes, man-hole covers, bends  etc. For the assessment year 1989-90, the Commercial Tax Officer, Narayanguda  Circle,  Hyderabad levied sales  tax  upon  the turn-over relating to said products treating them as general

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 10  

goods.   He overruled the petitioner’s contention  that  the said  products are declared goods liable to tax at the  rate of  4%  only.  The assessees’ appeal  preferred  before  the Appellate  Deputy Commissioner is still pending.   Evidently because  no  stay  was granted pending the  said  appeal,  a notice  was issued to the appellant calling upon him to  pay the  tax assessed, against which notice he preferred a  writ petition, being W.P. No. 9315 of 1992, in the High Court  of Andhra  Pradesh.  His main contention in the  writ  petition was that by virtue of G.O.Ms. No. 383 Revenue (S) Department dated 17.4.1985, his products are ’declared goods’ and  are, therefore, liable to tax only @4%. The  Division  Bench of the High Court  dismissed  the  writ petition following its earlier decision in Deccan  Engineers v.  State of Andhra Pradesh (reported in 1991, Vol. 12  A.P. Sales  Tax Generals, 138: 84 STC 92).  In Deccan  Engineers, it was held by the A.P. High Court that the expression’ cast iron’  in  item(2)(i)of  the Third Schedule  to  the  Andhra Pradesh  General  Sales Tax Act does not  include  cast-iron pipes,  man-hole covers and bends etc.  In this appeal,  the correctness of the said view is questioned. Third  Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax  Act pertains to 436 "declared goods in respect of which a single point tax  only is  leviable under section 6". Section 6 was enacted by  the A.P.  Legislature.to accord with sections 14 and 15  of  the Central Sales Tax Act.  Item(2) of the third Schedule to the A.P. Act reads as follows:                        THIRD SCHEDULE              (As amended upto 15th August 1987) Declared  goods in respect of which a single point tax  only is leviable under Section 6. ------------------------------------------------------------ S.No. Description of goods    Points of levy  Rate of Tax ------------------------------------------------------------ (1)       (2)                       (3)          (4) ------------------------------------------------------------ (1)  ................... (2)  Iron and steel, that is       -do-       *4-do-     to say; -(3002) (i)  pig  iron  and  cast iron including ingot moulds, bottom plates, iron scrap, cast iron scrap, runner scrap and iron skill scrap; (ii) steel sends (ingots, slabs, blooms and billets of all qualities,  shapes and sizes); (iii)skelp   bars,    tin bars,  sheet  bars,  hoe- bars and sleeper bars; (iv) steel bars  (rounds, rods,   squares,   flats, octagons  and   hexagons; plain   and   ribbed   or twisted; in coil form  as well as straight length); (v)  steel    structurals (angles,          joints, channels,   tees,   sheet pilling   sections.     Z sections  or  any   other rolled sections); (vi) sheets,       hoops, strips  and  skelp,  both

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 10  

black and galvanised, hot and  cold  rolled,  plain and  corrugated  in   all qualities,  in   straight lengths and in coil form, as rolled and in revitted condition; (vii)plates  both   plain and   chequered  in   all qualities; (viii)discs,       rings, forgoings    and    steel castings; (ix) tool,   alloy    and special steels of any  of the above categories; (x)  steel melting  scrap in  all  forms  including steel skull, turnings and borings, (xi) steel  tubes,   both welded and seamless, of   all  diameters   and lengths,including    tube fittings; (xii)tin-plates, both not dipped  and  electrolytic and tin free plates; (xiii)fish  plate   bars, bearing             plate bars,crossing     sleeper bars,    fish     plates, bearing plates,  crossing sleepers   and    pressed steel  sleepers,   rails- heavy  and  light   crane rails;       (xiv)wheels, tyres,  axles  and  wheel sets; (xv) wire rods and  wires rolled,            drawn, galvanised,   aluminised, tinned or coated such  as by copper; (xvi)defectives, rejects, cuttings or end pieces of any    of    the    above categories. --------------------------------------------------------- Item  (2) of the Third Schedule to the A.P. Act is an  exact replica of item (iv) of section 14 of the Central Sales  Tax Act.  According to section 15 of the Central Act,  ’declared goods’  cannot  be taxed at a rate exceeding 4% or  at  more than one stage. The   pracise  question  that  was  considered   in   Deccan Engineering  (followed  in the judgment  under  appeal)  was whether  the  ’cast  iron  castings’  manufactured  by   the petitioner in that case are cast iron’within the meaning  of item  (2)  (i) of the Third Schedule to the A.P.  Act/  Item (iv) (i) of section 14 of the C.S.T. Act.  At this stage, it is  necessary to a certain precisely what does  ’cast  iron’ mean and how are the products of the appellant manufactured. ’Cast  iron’ is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary  as "a hard alloy of iron, carbon and silicon cast in a  mould". According  to  New Lexicon Webster’s dictionary  of  English

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 10  

language,  the word ,cast iron’ means "an iron-carbon  alloy produced  in a blast furnace.  It contains upto  4%  carbon, and  is  more brittle, but more easily fused,  than  steel." According  to Van Nostrand’s Scientific encyclopedia,  ’cast iron’ is "primarily the product of remelting and casting pig iron".  (Interestingly,  the expression  ’cast-iron’-with  a hyphen between’cast’ and’iron’  has been defined separately as  meaning  "made of cast iron".  So far as  item  (iv)  of section 14 is concerned, the official publication spells the expression   cast  iron’  without  a  hyphen.    Though   an authorised publication of the A.P. Act is not placed  before us,  we presume that the printing of the said expression  in the  private  publication placed before  us  represents  the correct  rendering  it is without a  hyphen.)  That  ’cast iron’ is different from ’cast iron 438 castings’  is brought out in the following extract from  the Judgment  in ’Deccan Engineering’, which is equally true  in the case of the appellant as well: .LM15 "The   assessee  manufacturers  and  sells   various   goods mentioned  earlier  made from cast iron which  has  suffered sales  tax.  The controversy is whether these several  goods sold  by  the petitioners continue to be the  same  declared goods  covered  by  the aforesaid  entry  or  are  different commercial commodity liable to levy of State Sales Tax.  The case  of the Revenue is that, items sold by  the  petitioner are,  therefore,  exigible to tax as a  distinct  commercial commodity.   It is contended by the learned counsel for  the assessee  that  the  relevant entry in  section  14  of  the Central  Act also IIIrd Schedule of the State Act  speak  of cast  iron including ingots, moulds and bottom plates,  iron scrap etc. which indicates that any casting made out of cast iron also should be treated as included in the entry because of  the word used ’including’ in the entry.  It  is  further contended that the Government of India in their letters have clarified  that cast iron castings are covered by cast  iron and the State Government has also issued the aforesaid  G.O. subsequently under Section 42(2) of the State Act clarifying that  the  cast iron castings are covered  within  the  term cast-iron." It  is thus clear that ’cast iron’ is different  from  ’cast iron  castings’ manufactured by the appellant.  ’Cast  iron’ is purchased by the appellant and from that’ cast iron’,  he manufactures several goods, like manhole covers, bends, cast iron  pipes, etc.  In other words, ’cast iron’ used in  item (iv) of section 14 of the Central Act is the material out of which the petitioner’s products are manufactured.   Position remains  the same, even if the appellant purchases iron  and mixes  it  with carbon and silicon  thereby  deriving  ’cast iron’  and then pours it into different moulds.  In  sum,  1 cast  iron’ is different from the cast iron  pipes,  manhole covers,  bends etc, manufactured and sold by the  appellant. It  cannot be denied, in such a situation that the  products manufactured  by the appellant are, in commercial  parlance, different  and  distinct goods from the cast  iron.   Indeed this  aspect is not seriously disputed by Shri Ganguli,  the learned  counsel  for the appellant.  His case  is  entirely based upon certain clarifications and circulars issued  both by the Central and State Governments and in particular  upon an  order  issued  by the Andhra  Pradesh  Government  under section 42(2) of the A.P. Act namely viz., G.O. Ms. No.  383 dated  17.4.1985.  It is, therefore, necessary to  refer  to them. The  earliest  clarification  is the one  contained  in  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 10  

latter  dated  28th February, 1977 from  the  Department  of Revenue and Banking (Revenue Wing)  439 Government   of  India  addressed  to  the   Finance/Revenue Secretaries of all State Governments and Union  Tarritories. It reads thus: "Subject:Clarification   as  to  whether  the   term’   Cast               Iron’  mentioned in section 14(iv) (i) of  the               Central  Sales Tax Act, 1956 would cover  cast               Iron casting. In  continuation of the marginally noted communications  and with  reference  to this Department’s letter No.  24/3n3-ST.               dt. 20.11.1973, I am directed to say that  the               question  whether the expression  ’cast  iron’               used in Section (iv) (i) of the Central  Sales               Tax Act, 1956 will include’ Cast iron casting’               has been re-examined in consultation with  the               Directorate General of Technical  Development,               Chief Chemist and the Ministry of Law, Justice               &  Company Affairs.  This Department has  been               advised  that  the existing  expression  ’cast               iron’  in  the aforesaid  section  will  cover               ’cast iron casting also                                          Yours faithfully,                                                Sd/-                                  Deputy Secretary,to the                                        Govt. of India." Pursuant   to  the  above  clarification  by   the   Central Government, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Andhra Pradesh intimated all the Deputy commissioners  of commercial  Taxes  of the State that "Cast  Iron  Pipes  and specials  should be subjected to tax as falling under  "Cast Iron"  liable to tax @4% at the point of first sale  in  the State under entry 2 of the III Schedule of A.P.G.S.T.  Act." To  the same effect is another clarification issued  by  the Commissioner  of  Commercial  Taxes,  Government  of  Andhra Pradesh to his subordinate officials on 12.3.1982. The next clarification from the Government of India was on 3 1st  January,  1984.   It appears  that  the  Government  of Haryana  had written to the Central Government stating  that ’cast iron castings’ cannot be treated as declared goods and requested  the Ministry of Finance, Government of  India  to examine  the same.  It was in reply to the said  query  that the  letter  dated 3 1st January, 1984 was  written  by  the Government  of  India, Ministry of  Finance,  Department  of Revenue   to  the  Financial  Commissioner  and   Secretary, Government of Haryana, Excise and Taxation Department.   The letter says that the matter has been considered carefully by the Department in consultation with the Ministry of Law  and the Director 440 General of Technical Development.  It set out the opinion of the  Ministry  of Law as also the opinion  of  the  Director General  of  technical Development.   The  latter’s  opinion reads: "Cast  iron  is an alloy iron of Carbon  silicon  and  other alloying  elements if required i.e. Cast Iron  Castings  are covered under the term Cast Iron’.  It may also be clarified that’ cast     Iron’ include Gray Iron, Chilled Malleable and               Nodular Iron.  Ingot Moulds and Bottom  Plates               are nothing but Cast Iron Castings". After  setting out the said two opinions, the Government  of India expressed its opinion in the following words: "In accordance with the above advice, cast iron castings are covered  under  the  term  "Cast  Iron......................

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 10  

State  Government  may  kindly bring this  position  to  the notice of Sales Tax authorities of the State.  If considered necessary  this  may  be  placed  before  the  Committee  of Commissioners of Sales Tax Commercial Tax set up under  this Ministry’s  letter No. Receipt of this letter may please  be acknowledged.". Copies  of  this letter were communicated to all  the  State Governments and Admissions of Union Territories. On 20th July, 1984 the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (S)   Department  issued  a  memorandum  referring  to   the aforesaid  letter  of  the  Central  Government  dated  31st January, 1984 and reaffirming that "’Cast Iron Castings’ are covered  within the item Cast Iron including ingot’ in  sub- item  (i) of item No. 2 of the Third Schedule to the  Andhra Pradesh  General  Sales  Tax  Act".  On  the  same  day  the Principal  Secretary,to the Government,  Revenue  Department addressed  a letter to the Secretary, Andhra  Pradesh  Small Scale  Industries  Association,  Vijayawada  informing   the Association  that  "a clarification has been issued  to  the Commissioner  of Commercial Taxes to the effect  that  "cast iron  castings"  are  covered within  the  term  "cast  iron including ingot" in sub-item (i) of item No. 2 of the  Third Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957." On 27th March, 1984, however, the Commissioner of commercial Taxes,  Government of Andhra Pradesh addressed a  letter  to all  his  subordinate  officers stating  that  the  question whether  ’cast  iron castings’ fall within  the  expression, 441 ‘cast  iron’  is  pending before the High  Court  of  Andhra Pradesh and, therefore, the collection of arrears of tax due on  ’raw castings’ is stayed for a period of one  year.   At the end of one year, he said, the matter will be reexamined. On 17th April, 1985 the Government of Andhra Pradesh  issued a  clarification  contained in G.O.Ms. No.  383  under  sub- section  (2)  of  section 42 of the A.P. Act.   It  will  be appropriate to set out the G.O. in full:                "GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH                           ABSTRACT Andhra  Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957-Levy,  of  Sales Tat on ’Cast Iron Casting’ Clarification issued. REVENUE (S) DEPARTMENT. G. O. Ms. No. 383.                 Dated 17.04.1985                                    Read the followings:- 1.   Govt.  Memo. 2216/SI/83-4. dt. 20.7.84, 2.   Lr.  No. 2216/83-4, dt. 20.7.84 addressed to  Secretary A.P. Small Scale Industries Association, Vijayawada 3.   From  the CCT’s Ref.  D.O.FE.Lr. III (3) /1490/84,  dt. 24.7.1984. 4.   Government Memo 3166/SI/84-4, dt. 13.11.1984. 5.   From the CCT.D.O. on CCT’S.  Ref.  LI/(i) /1063/82 6.   Govt.  Memo No. 3166/SI/84-5, dt. 22.2.1985. 7.   From the commissioner   of   Commercial   Taxes,   Ref.               A3/LI/1093/82 dt. 19.3.1983.                            ORDER: The  Andhra  Pradesh  Small  Scale  Industries   Association Vijayawada requested the Government to clarify whether ’cast iron’  and  ’cast  iron  castings’  are  one  and  the  same commercial commodity. 442               2.    This  matter was examined at  length  by               the  Government of India in consultation  with               Ministry of Law, (Department of legal Affairs)               and    Director    General    of    Techinical               Development.    The   Ministry   of   Finance,               Department  of  Revenue, Government  of  India

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 10  

             clarified, in their letter F.No. 24/10/80/-ST.               dt.  31.1.1984. to the effect that "cast               iron  castings"  are covered within  the  term               "cast iron".               3.    Government  have examined in detail  the               legal  aspects of the issue and  observe  that               the  term "cast iron including ingot,  moulds,               bottom plates" as in sub-item (i) of item 2 in               the  Third  Schedule  to  the  Andhra  Pradesh               Central  Sales Tax covers "cast iron  casting"               and  as  such "cast iron castings"  is  not  a               different   commercial  commodity   from   the               commodity "cast iron including ingot,  moulds,               bottom plates."               4.    Under  sub-section (2) of section 42  of               the Andhra Pradesh General Seles Tax Act, 1957               the  Government hereby clarify that the  "cast               castings"  are covered within the  term  "cast               iron  including ingot, moulds, bottom  plates"               occurred  in  sub-item (i) of item 2  of  this               Third  Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh  General               Sales Tax Act, 1957.               (emphasis added)               (BY  ORDER  IN  THE NAME OF  THE  GOVERNOR  OF               ANDHRA PRADESH)                          C.R. NAIR,             PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT." Section 42 of the A.P. Act confers upon the State Government the  power to remove difficulties.  Sub-section (i)  confers the said power to meet the problems arising from  transition from  the  previous Sales Tax Act to the present  Sales  Tax Act.   An  order  under sub-section (1) is  required  to  be published  in the A.P. Gazette.  Sub-section (2) is  general in  nature.  An order under sub-section (2) is not  required to be published in the A.P. Gazette.  Section 42 reads: "42 Power to remove difficulties:- (1)  If  any  difficulty  arises in  giving  effect  to  the provisions  of this Act in consequence of the transition  to the said provisions from the  443 corresponding  provisions of the Acts in  force  immediately before  the commencement of this Act, the  State  Government may,  by  order in the Andhra Pradesh  Gazettle,  make  such provisions  as appear to them to be neccessary or  expedient for removing the difficulty. (2)  If  any  difficulty  arises in  giving  effect  to  the provisions  of this Act (otherwise than in relation  to  the transition  from the provisions of the corresponding Act  in force  before  the  commencement of  this  Act),  the  State Government   may,  by  order  make  such   provisions,   not inconsistent  with  the purposes of this Act, as  appear  to them   to  be necessary   or  expedient  for  removing   the               difficulty." An  order issued under section 42, is undoubtedly  statutory in character. A  word  about the validity of section 42  of  the  A.P.Act. Section  37 of the Payment of Bonus Act conferred a  similar power upon the Central Government; it further declared  that any  such  order  would be final.  It was truck  down  by  a Constitution  Bench  of this Court in Jalan Trading  Co.  v. Mill Mazdoor Sabha [1967] 1 SCR 15 as amounting to excessive delegation  of legislative power.  However. in a  subsequent decision in Gammon India Limited etc. etc. v. Union of India &  Ors. etc. [1974] 3 S.C.R. 665, it has been  explained  by another  Constitution  Bench  that  the  decision  in  Jalan

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 10  

Trading  was influenced by the words occuring at the end  of section  37 of the Payment of Bonus Act to the  effect  that the direction of the Government issued thereunder was final. Inasmuch  as the said words are not there in section  34  of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, it was held, section 34 cannot be said to suffer from the  vice of  excessive delegation of legislative power.  It is  meant "for  giving  effect to the provisions of the Act,"  it  was held.  Sub-section (2) of section 42 of the A.P. Act does no doubt not contain the aforesaid offending words, and can not therefore  be  characterised as invalid.  Yet,  it  must  be remembered that the said power can be exercised "for  giving effect to the provisions of the Act", and not in  derogation thereof.  As we shall presently indicate it is necessary  to bear  this limitation in mind while examining the effect  of G.O.Ms. 3,83. So  far  as clarifications kirculars issued by  the  Central Government  and/or  State  Government  are  concerned,  they represent  merely  their  understanding  of  the   statutory provisions.   They are not binding upon the  Courts.   IT-is true   that   those  clarifications   and   circulars   were communicated  to the concerned dealers but even  so  nothing prevents the State from recovering the tax, if in truth such tax was leviable according to law., There can be no estoppel against  the statute. the understanding of  the  Government, whether in favour or against the assessee, is 444 nothing  more  than its understanding and  opinion.   It  is doubtful whether such clarifications and circulars bind  the quasi-judicial functioning of the authorities under the Act. While  acting in quasi-judicial capacity, they are bound  by law  and not by any administrative  instructions,  opinions, clarifications  or  circulars.  Law is what is  declared  by this Court and the High Court- to wit, it is for this  Court and  the  High  Court  to declare  what  does  a  particular provision  of  statute say, and not for the  executive.   of course, the Parliament/Legislature never speaks or  explains what does a provision enacted by it mean. (See Sanjeev  Coke Manufacturing  Company v. Mls.  Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.  and another, A.I.R. 1983 SC 239. Now  coming  to  G.O.  Ms.  383,  it  is  undoubtedly  of  a statutorily  characterbut,  as  explained  hereinbefore  the power  under section 42 cannot be utilised for altering  the provisions  of  the Act but only for giving  effect  to  the provisions of the Act.  Since the goods manufactured by  the appellant  are different and distinct goods from cast  iron, their sale attracts the levy created by the Act.  In such  a case,  the government can not say, in exercise of its  power under section 42 (2) that the levy created by the Act  shall not  be  effective or operative.  In other words,  the  said power  cannot  be  utilised for  dispensing  with  the  levy created  by  the Act, over a class of goods or  a  class  of persons,  as the case may be.  For doing that, the power  of exemption  conferred by section 9 of the A.P. Act has to  be exercised.   Though it is not argued before us, we tried  to see  the possibility but we find it difficult to relate  the order  in G.O. Ms. 383 to the power of the Government  under section 9, apart from the fact that the nature and character of  the  power under section 42 is different  from  the  one conferred by Section 9. As exemption under section 9 has  to be  granted not only by a notification, it is also  required to  be published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette.  It  is  not suggested,  nor is it brought to our notice, that  G.O.  Ms. 383 was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette.  This  does not, however, preclude the Government of Andhra Pradesh from

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 10  

exercising  the said power of exemption, in accordance  with law,  if  it is so advised.  We need express no  opinion  on that score. The learned counsel for the appellant brought to our  notice that  the  very  same  Division  Bench  which  rendered  the decision  in Deccan Engineers had rendered another  decision in  Tax Revision Case No. 93 of 1990 (The State of  A.P.  v. Pratap Steel) applying G.O. Ms. 383 and giving relief to the dealer.  It is argued that the Division Bench ought to  have taken  the same view in Deccan Engineers as well.   We  have perused  the  decision  in  Pratap Steel.   It  is  a  short judgment  dismissing the Revision applying G.O.Ms. 383.   It does not appear that the matter was argued in the manner  it was  in  Deccan Engineers.  The  said  argument,  therefore, cannot advance the case of the appellant.  445 In this view of the matter in is not necessary for us to  go into  the question wether the word including in  section  14 (iv)  (i) of Central Sales Tax Act and item (2) (i)  of  the Third Schedule to the A.P. Act has the effect of making  the said subclause exhaustive or otherwise. Accordingly,   we   bold   that   the   cast-iron   castings manufactured  by  the  appellants do  not  fall  within  the expression  ’cast iron’ in Entry 2(i) of the Third  Schedule of  the  Andhra  Pradesh General Sales  Tax  Act  or  within Section 14 (iv)(i)  of the Central Sales Tax Act. The appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed.  No order  as to costs. W. P. No.763 OF 1992 This  writ  petition  preferred  under  Article  32  of  the Constitution  is directed against the notices issued by  the assessing  authority proposing to reopen the assessments  of the petitioner/appellant with respect to earlier  assessment years  and  also seeking to apply the  principle  of  Deccan Engineers  to  the  pending assessments.   For  the  reasons stated   hereinabove  this  writ  petition  fails   and   is accordingly dismissed.  No costs. G.S.B.                  Appeal and petition dismissed. 446