Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 180-186_OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.3194-3200/2018)

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (LEGAL), COMMERCIAL TAXES, RAJASTHAN & ANR.   ……APPELLANTS

Versus

M/S. LOHIYA AGENCIES & ANR. ….RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. ‘Gypsum’  (calcium  sulphate  dihydrate  –  CaSO4.2H2O)  is  a  natural

mineral which is used in a variety of activities and products like pesticides, as

a soil additive, as a water additive, as a food additive, for plant treatment,

but,  more  importantly,  in  the  present  context,  for  construction  purposes.

Under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as

‘RVAT’), Entry 56 of Schedule IV specified ‘Gypsum’ as a taxable entity, at

4%.  This Entry was, however, amended and substituted vide Notification No.

F.12(63)FD/Tax/2005-19, dated 19.4.2006, notified,  inter alia, to expand the

1

meaning of Entry 56 of Schedule IV of the RVAT by changing it to ‘Gypsum in

all  its  forms’.   The  short  question  which  arises  for  consideration  in  the

present appeal is whether ‘gypsum board’ would fall within this Entry 56, and

be taxed at 4%, for the relevant assessment years, or whether it would fall in

the then residuary Entry 1 of Schedule V, to be taxed at 12.5%.

3. The brief  facts  which have given rise to the present dispute are as

follows.   M/s.  Indian  Gypsum  Ltd.  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  ‘IGL’),  a

manufacturer  of  what  is  commonly  known as  drywall  or  ‘gypsum board’,

moved  an  application  under  Section  36  of  RVAT  before  the  Additional

Commissioner,  Commercial  Tax  Department,  Rajasthan,  Jaipur  for

ascertaining whether gypsum board would fall  within the category of  the

amended Entry 56 of Schedule IV of the RVAT, with 4% rate of tax applicable,

or  under  the  residuary  Entry  referred  to  aforesaid.   The  Additional

Commissioner,  vide  order  dated  27.9.2007,  opined  that  ‘gypsum  board’,

being  commercially  a  different  product  would  not  fall  under  Entry  56  of

Schedule IV of the RVAT but would fall under the residuary Entry, making it

subject to the 12.5% slab of taxation.  The gravamen of reasoning of the

Additional Commissioner, as found from the order, is that ‘gypsum board’ is a

separate commercial product using a different name and thus the factum of

95% of the ‘gypsum board’ being constituted of gypsum is not relevant, as

supported  by  the  fact  that  a  long  manufacturing  process  is  involved  in

preparing ‘gypsum board’,  wherein  in  addition  to the calcination process,

2

additives, paper, foam, water etc., are used, resulting in the formation of a

product having uses, quite dissimilar to gypsum.  

4. M/s.  Lohiya  Agencies/respondent  No.1,  is  stated  to  be  a  merchant

dealing in ‘gypsum board’ procured from IGL and, thus, came to be assessed

by the Commercial Tax Officer for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08

on 25.8.2007,  post-inspection of  his  premises.   Since the sale of  gypsum

board has been made with the VAT rate at 4% despite the said goods not

falling under Entry 56 of Schedule IV of the RVAT, it was alleged by the Tax

Department that there was tax evasion which led to initiation of proceedings

under Sections 25, 55 & 61 of RVAT and the respondent firm was made liable

to  pay the  differential  tax  of  8.5% for  the  assessment  years,  along  with

penalty  and interest.   The endeavours  of  the respondent  No.1,  assessee,

before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)  failed in terms of  order dated

2.1.2009  and  also  before  the  Rajasthan  Tax  Board  vide  order  dated

21.11.2012.   This  culminated in  a revision petition being filed before the

Rajasthan High Court which, however, reversed the views expressed by the

forums below, in terms of the impugned order dated 3.2.2017.  In arriving at

such a conclusion, the High Court relied upon judgments of the Bombay High

Court in  Commissioner of Sales Tax, Mumbai v.  India Gypsum Ltd.1 and the

Supreme Court in The States of Gujarat v. Sakarwala Brothers2 as well as in

Trutuf Safety Glass Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P.3

1 (2009) 25 VST 210 (Bom.). 2 (1967) 19 STC 24 (SC). 3 (2007) 7 SCC 242.

3

5. We  have  had  the  benefit  of  arguments  and  reference  to  judicial

pronouncements,  by  both  the  parties  before  us  with  Mr.  Harsha  Vinoy,

learned counsel canvassing the case of the appellant, while on behalf of the

respondent No.1, the submissions were made by Mr. M.P. Devanath, learned

counsel.

6. In our considered view, to truly appreciate the controversy at hand,

two aspects have to be kept in mind.  Firstly, the change of the Entry by a

conscious decision of the legislature, whereby the Entry of mere ‘gypsum’

was  changed  to  ‘gypsum  in  all  its  forms’.   This  certainly  signified  that

something more than basic gypsum was sought to be included in the Entry

by referring to  ‘gypsum in  all  its  forms’.  The sequitur  would  be  whether

‘gypsum board’ would fall  in the expanded definition of ‘gypsum in all its

forms’ or whether it is completely a different product.

7. Secondly  (it  is  really  in  order  to  appreciate  the  first),  what  is  the

original composition of gypsum, and how does the processing convert it into

gypsum board, would have to be examined.

8. Gypsum wallboard is a cellulosic composite material,  also known as

drywall, used as an interior wall in many building applications and also in

limited external applications.  This composite material consists of a flat board

comprising  of  a  gypsum  core  with  the  external  surfaces  covered  with

paperboard.   The  result  is  a  three-layer  composite  composed  of

4

paper/gypsum/paper.   The  primary  raw material  continues  to  be  gypsum

mineral [Calcium Sulphate Dihydrate (CaSO4.2H2O)] and cellulose.

9. A perusal of the material available in public domain on manufacture of

gypsum board shows a common thread insofar as methodology is concerned.

It will be useful to extract the process from one such material as under:-

“Gypsum board is manufactured in a two step process. In  the  first  step,  finely  crushed  and  ground  gypsum [calcium sulphate dihydrate (CaSO4.2H2O)] is heated and partially  dehydrated  (Calcined)  to  Calcium  Sulphate Hemihydrate  (CaSO4.½H2O),  called  stucco  in  the industry,  also popularly known as ‘Plaster of  Paris’.   A unique characteristic of stucco is that when it is mixed with  the  proper  amount  of  water,  it  forms  a  smooth plastic  mass  which  can  be  molded  into  any  desired shape.  When the hardening has been completed, the mass has been chemically restored to its rock-like state. This  characteristic  has  also  been  used  in  the development and production of gypsum board.  In the second step of  manufacturing process stucco is mixed with number of additives, foam and an excess amount of water to prepare gypsum slurry which is extruded on a fast moving, continuous board production line between two  layers  of  special  gypsum  papers.  ‘Raw’  gypsum board is then allowed to fully hydrate – calcium sulphate hemi hydrate is converted back to dihydrate – before it is cut to desired size and before it enters a ‘gypsum kiln’, where  at  elevated  temperature  the  excess  water  is driven off.”4

10. In commercial terms, ‘gypsum board’ is defined as gypsum between

two paper sheets.  Gypsum derived from recycled gypsum board can be used

in many ways in which gypsum is originally used too, such as –

(a) The manufacture of new drywall 4 See para 2.2 of the article ‘Life Cycle Analysis of Gypsum Board and Associated Finishing Products’ by George J Venta, The Athena Sustainable Materials Institute, Ottawa, Canada (March 1997).

5

(b) Use as an ingredient in the production of cement

(c) Application to soils and crops to improve soil drainage and plant

growth

(d) A major ingredient in the production of fertilizer products

(e) An additive to composting operations5

11. If  we  look  into  other  forms  of  gypsum,  where  gypsum  is  innately

present in the end product, two examples stare at us: (i) Plaster of Paris and

(ii)  gypsum blocks.   Plaster of  Paris  (stucco)  is  merely calcinated calcium

sulphate, a dehydrated form of gypsum.  Gypsum Blocks, on the other hand,

are composed of gypsum plaster,  water and in some cases additives like

vegetable or wood fibre, for greater strength.  The gypsum boards are used

as thinner plasterboards for paneling stud walls.  The aforesaid material itself

gives rise to the conclusion that there are no major chemical  changes in

gypsum  which  are  carried  out  other  than  dehydration  and  mixing  of

additives, so that the paper sheets can be used on both sides, to be made

capable of being used as a board.

12. Keeping in mind the aforesaid factual findings, let us turn to the judicial

views dealing with the subject in question, whether relating to gypsum board

or in respect of other products, where there is derivation of some other end

product.

5 See  Construction  &  Demolition  Recycling  Association:  Gypsum  Drywall,  available  at http://cdrecycling.org/materials/gypsum-wall/.

6

(1) Commissioner of Sales Tax, Mumbai v. India Gypsum Ltd. (supra)

The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court was concerned with a

similar legal conundrum as to whether ‘gypsum board’ would fall under the

Entry C-41 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act which reads as ‘gypsum

of all forms and descriptions’.  The court opined that the legislature having

used the  phraseology,  some meaning  would  have to  be  assigned  to  the

words  by  which  there  would  be an  explanation  of  the  terminology.   The

Division Bench, relying on the case of State of Gujarat v. Sakarwala Brothers

(supra) observed that the expression ‘form’ was used for items with various

shapes,  sizes  as  well  as  uses  vis-à-vis  the  original  product.   It  was  the

chemical  composition  of  the  substance  in  question  that  mattered  for

deciding whether it fell within the scope of a particular Entry.  Since the main

composition of gypsum board continues to be gypsum, which takes the form

of the board, gypsum board was held to fall in Entry C-41 of the Maharashtra

Value Added Tax Act.  

(2) Trutuf Safety Glass Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax (supra)

This  judgment  has  been  used  as  an  aid  in  the  impugned  order  to

support the conclusion in favour of the assessee.

’12.  …………….  The  word  'form'  connotes  a  visible aspect such as shape or mode in which a thing exists or manifests itself, species, kind or variety. The use of the word 'in all forms' is different from the expression 'all kinds'. The conceptual difference between the words  "all  kinds'  and  'in  all  forms'  is  that  the former multiplies items of the same kind while the latter multiplies the same commodity in different

7

forms. The use of the word 'in all forms' widens the scope of the Entry.’   13. It  is  settled position in law that while interpreting the entry for the purpose of taxation,  recourse should not be made to the scientific meaning of the terms or expressions used but to their popular meaning, that  is  to say,  the meaning attached to them by those dealing  in  them.  This  is  what  is  known as "common parlance test’. ……………..  20. The question is not what may be supposed and has been intended but what has been said. ‘Statutes should be construed not as theorems of Euclid". Judge Learned Hand  said,  "but  words  must  be  construed  with  some imagination of the purposes which lie behind them’. (See Lenigh Valley Coal Co. v. Yensavage6). ………………..”

(emphasis supplied)

(3) State of Gujarat v. Sakarwala Brothers (supra)

The interpretation of Entry 47 of Schedule A to the Bombay Sales Tax

Act  came into  question  as  to  whether  patasa,  harda  and  alchidana were

‘forms’ of sugar containing more than 90% of sucrose.  Since the chemical

composition of all three was the same and they could be converted back into

sugar upon being dissolved in water, and being subjected to ‘appropriate

processes’, the court opined in favour of the assessee.  The Bench noted with

approval  that  in  a  similar  lis7 pertaining  to  the  question  of  whether

hydrogenated groundnut oil continued to be groundnut oil, notwithstanding

the processing carried out for the purpose of rendering the oil more stable, it

was opined that two conditions have to be satisfied – firstly, it must be from 6 218 FR 547. 7 Tungabhadra Industries Ltd v. Commercial Tax Officer, Kurnool (1961) 2 SCR 14.

8

groundnut oil and secondly, it must be oil.  Since hydrogenated oil was from

groundnut and, in its essential nature it remained an oil and continued to be

used for the same purpose as groundnut oil, the hydrogenated oil did not

alter its character as oil despite being semisolid.  

(4) State of Jharkhand and Ors v. LA Opala R.G. Ltd.8

This court examined whether glassware manufactured by the assessee

could be understood to be a ‘type of glass or glass sheet’ so as to be taxable

at the rate of 3% vide notification S.O No. 25, dated 25.06.2001, issued by

the government of Jharkhand.  It was observed as under:

‘22. It is a settled law that in taxing statutes the terms and  expressions  must  be  seen  in  their  common  and popular parlance and not be attributed their scientific or technical meanings. In common parlance, the two words “type” and “form” are not of the same import. According to  the Oxford  Dictionary,  whereas the meaning of  the expression “types” is “kind, class, breed, group, family, genus”; the meaning of the word “form” is “visible shape  or  configuration  of  something”  or  the “style,  design,  and  arrangement  in  an  artistic work  as  distinct  from  its  content”.  Similarly, Macmillan  Dictionary  defines  “type”  as  “a  group  of people or things with similar  qualities or  features that make them different from other groups” and “form” as “the particular way in which something appears or exists or a shape of someone or something”. Therefore, “types” are based on the broad nature of the item intended to be classified  and in  terms  of  “forms”,  the  distinguishable feature is the particular way in which the items exist. An example  could  be  the  item  “wax”.  The  types  of  wax would include animal, vegetable, petroleum, mineral or synthetic wax whereas the form of wax could be candles, lubricant wax, sealing wax, etc.’

8 (2014) 15 SCC 136.

9

(emphasis supplied)

(5)  Rajasthan Roller Flour Mills Assn v. State of Rajasthan9

Whether flour, maida and suji would fall under the meaning of the item

‘wheat’ under Section 14 of the Central Sales (Tax) Act was the question.

The relevant extract is as under:

23. The  following  observations  of  Venkataramiah,  J. in Raghurama Shetty [ (1) Ganesh Trading Co. v. State of Haryana,  (1974)  3  SCC  620  :  1974  SCC  (Tax)  100  : (1973)  32  STC 623;  (2) Babu  Ram Jagdish  Kumar  and Co. v. State of Punjab, (1979) 3 SCC 616 : 1979 SCC (Tax) 265  :  (1979)  44  STC  159  and  (3) State  of Karnataka v. Raghurama  Shetty,  (1981)  2  SCC  564  : 1981 SCC (Tax) 134 : (1981) 47 STC 369] can usefully be quoted: (SCC pp. 566-7, paras 8-11) “There is no merit in the submission made on behalf of the assesses that they had not consumed paddy when they produced rice from it  by merely  carrying out  the process  of  dehusking at their mills. Consumption in the true economic sense does not mean only use of goods in the production of  consumers’  goods  or  final  utilisation  of consumers’  goods  by  consumers  involving activities  like  eating  of  food,  drinking  of beverages,  wearing  of  clothes  or  using  of  an automobile by its owner for domestic purposes. A manufacturer  also  consumes  commodities  which are  ordinarily  called  raw  materials  when  he produces  semi-finished  goods  which  have  to undergo  further  processes  of  production  before they can be transformed into consumers’ goods. At  every such intermediate stage of  production, some utility or value is added to goods which are used as raw materials and at every such stage the raw materials are consumed. Take the case of bread. It  passes  through  the  first  stage  of  production  when wheat  is  grown  by  the  farmer,  the  second  stage  of production  when wheat  is  converted  into  flour  by  the

9 1994  Supp.(1) SCC 413.

10

miller  and the  third  stage of  production  when flour  is utilized by the baker to manufacture bread out of it. The miller  and  the  baker  have  consumed wheat  and  flour respectively in the course of their business. We have to understand the word ‘consumes’ in Section 6(i) of the Act in this economic sense. … At every stage of production, it is obvious there is consumption of goods even though at the end of it there may not  be  final  consumption  of  goods  but  only production of goods with higher utility which may be  used  in  further  productive  processes.  … Applying  the  above  test,  it  has  to  be  held  that  the assessees had consumed the paddy purchased by them when they converted it into rice which is commercially a different commodity.”

’24.  Applying  the  reasoning  adopted  hereinabove,  it must  be  held  that  when  wheat  is  consumed  for producing flour or maida or suji, the commodities so obtained are different commodities from wheat. The wheat loses its identity. It gets consumed and in its place new goods/commodities emerge. The new goods so emerging have a higher utility than the  commodity  consumed.  They  are  different goods commercially speaking….’

(emphasis supplied)

(6) Alladi Venkateswarlu & Ors. v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.10

Whether parched rice and puffed rice would fall under Entry 66(b) of

Schedule I  to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act,1957 which read

‘rice obtained from paddy that has met tax under the Act’ was the question

examined.

“12. Even if parched rice and puffed rice could be looked upon as separate in commercial character from rice as grain offered for sale in a market, yet, keeping in view the other matters mentioned

10 (1978) 2 SCC 552.

11

above,  it  could  not  be  presumed  that  it  was intended to exclude from entry 66 "rice", which at any rate, had not so changed its identity as not  to  be  describable  as  "rice"  at  all. 'Muramaralu'  was  after  all  rice  even  though  it was puffed. 'Atukulu' even though parched was still  called  rice. We  must  also  remember  that  the schedule which we have to interpret is in the English language  where  the  term  rice  is  still  found  in  the rendering or description of  'palalu'  as well  as that of 'muramaralu'  in  the  English  language.  And,  in  any case,  if  two  interpretations  of  a  provision  are possible,  we think that we ought to,  in such a case, apply the principle that the interpretation which favours the assessee should be preferred.”

(emphasis supplied)

(7) Tungabhadra  Industries  Ltd.  v.  The  Commercial  Tax  Officer,  Kurnool

(supra)

In  this  judgment already referred to aforesaid,  the following extract

may be useful for our purpose:

“08. But in the case of hydrogenated oil which is prepared from refined oil by the process of passing hydrogen into heated  oil  in  the  presence  of  a  catalyst  (usually  finely powdered nickel), two atoms of hydrogen are absorbed. A portion of the oleic acid which formed a good part of the content  of  the  groundnut  oil  in  its  raw  states  in(sic.)11 converted, by the absorption of the hydrogen atoms, into stearic acid and it  is this which gives the characteristic appearance as well  as the semi-solid condition which it attains.  In  the language of  the Chemist,  an inter- molecular or configurational chemical change takes place  which  results  in  the  hardening  of  the  oil. Though it continues to be the same edible fat that it  was  before  the  hardening,  and  its  nutritional properties continue to be the same, it has acquired new properties in that the tendency to rancidity is

11 To be read as ‘is’.

12

greatly  removed,  is  easier  to  keep  and  to transport.”

(emphasis supplied)

The  aforesaid  observations  are  important  as  inter-molecular  or

configurational chemical changes that resulted in the hardening of the oil

was held not to exclude it from the Entry.

Our view

13. On  giving  consideration  to  the  matter  in  issue,  we  find  that  the

amended Entry 56 of Schedule IV of the RVAT, read as ‘gypsum in all its

forms’, would include ‘gypsum board’ under the term ‘all its forms’.

14. We are persuaded to come to the aforesaid conclusion on the basis

that, it can hardly be doubted that a meaning has to be given to the Entry

made  by  the  legislature,  expanding  the  original  Entry  from  ‘gypsum’  to

‘gypsum in all its forms’.  If the object was to include only ‘gypsum’, then

why would the Entry be changed to ‘gypsum in all its forms’? The corollary

would also be as to what is meant by ‘in all its forms’, as it is not, as if mere

geometrical alteration of a shape would form part of the Entry.  In such a

situation,  the  original  Entry  itself  was  comprehensive  enough  to  have

included it.  We have noticed the view taken by the Bombay High Court in an

almost identical situation except that the Entry there was ‘of all forms and

descriptions’.  But the discussion was more or less confined to the expression

13

‘of all forms’.  This court in Sakarwala Brothers (supra) observed that it was

the chemical  composition  of  the  substance in  question  that  mattered,  to

decide whether it would fall within the scope of a particular Entry.  In the

present  case,  there  is  really  no  chemical  change  which  occurs  in  the

substance as dehydration only reduces the water content and thereafter, it is

mixed with additives for the purpose of increasing bonding and other related

purposes.  Substantively, the character of ‘gypsum’ is not changed in the

mechanical  exercise  of  converting  it  into  a  board  along  with,  of  course,

certain chemical  processes of heating and mixing, to achieve an ultimate

objective.

15. The  observations  of  this  Court  in  Trutuf  Safety  Glass  Industries

(supra) are of significance, where a distinction is sought to be made between

the words ‘in all forms’ as juxtaposed to the expression ‘all kinds’. The words

‘all kinds’ are said to be restricted to multiple items of the same kind, while

the expression ‘in all forms’ is to multiply the same commodity into different

forms.   Therefore,  different  ‘forms’  of  gypsum would  get  included  in  the

expression ‘in all forms’.

16. A reference to the timeless statement of Hand, J. that ‘words must be

construed with some imagination of the purposes which lie behind them’,

would require us to construe the expression ‘in all  forms’ being added to

‘gypsum’ to naturally include not only just gypsum in its original form but in

different forms as well.

14

17. To fully understand the scope of  Entry 56 of Schedule IV of the RVAT,

we  have  looked  into  the  manufacturing  process  of  gypsum  board.   A

reference to the extract aforesaid would show that the initial steps are of

only crushing and grinding the gypsum whereafter it is heated and partially

dehydrated, which in turn is called ‘stucco’ or ‘Plaster of Paris’.  There does

not appear to be any doubt that such ‘stucco’ would form part of the Entry

‘in all its forms’.  The unique characteristic of stucco, when mixed with water,

is that the smooth plastic mass so formed can be molded into the desired

shape,  which  obtains  its  rock-like  state  on  hardening.   This  very

characteristic  is  stated to be used in  the development and production of

gypsum board.  In the second step of the manufacturing process, stucco is

mixed with a number of additives in an excess amount of water to prepare a

slurry, to be ultimately converted back into a dehydrated form, before being

cut  into  desired  sizes.   Not  only  that,  ‘gypsum board’  is  defined as  real

gypsum between two paper sheets.  Will that take away from the description

of gypsum?  We think not.  Even if the sheets are added, the wide description

‘in all its forms’ would certainly include ‘gypsum board’.

18. In the case of  Sakarwala Brothers  (supra), the factum of there being

the  same  chemical  composition  of  patasa,  harda  and  alchidana and  the

ability to convert them back into sugar on being dissolved in water and on

being subjected to other ‘appropriate processes’, resulted in a finding that

they would be included as ’any form of sugar’.  In fact, gypsum board, devoid

of its top and bottom boards, can be utilized, with some processing, in a

15

similar manner as gypsum.  When the meaning of the word ‘form’ is meant

to include ‘visible shape or configuration of something’, as observed in State

of Jharkhand (supra), we cannot see any reason why gypsum board would

not form a part of the expanded terminology ’in all its forms’.  

19. In the same line, this Court in Alladi Venkateswarlu (supra), has given

an expanded definition to ‘rice obtained from paddy that has met tax under

the Act’ to include parched rice and puffed rice within the term ‘rice’ as it

had not changed its identity so as to not be describable as ‘rice’ at all. A

broad interpretation was, thus sought to be given by applying the ‘common

sense’ rule of interpretation.  Similarly, this Court in Tungabhadra Industries

Ltd  (supra)  observed  that  even  if  an  inter-molecular  or  configurational

chemical  change  takes  place  which  results  in  hardening  of  the  oil,  its

nutritional properties continue to be the same. Moreover, even if it acquires

new properties,  in  the  sense  that  the  tendency  to  turn  rancid  is  greatly

removed and it is easier to transport, ‘hydrogenated groundnut oil’ was held

not to be excluded from the original Entry of ‘groundnut oil’.

20. All the aforesaid examples show that wherever an expression ‘in all its

forms’ is used, it has resulted in an expanded meaning, which is a logical

corollary of such an expression being added to the original Entry.  To take a

view  to  the  contrary  in  the  given  situation  would  amount  to  giving  no

meaning  to  the  added  expression  as  there  are  really  not  too  many

possibilities on what could have been included in such an expression.

16

21. We may also note another fact which has come to our notice that in

terms  of  notification  No.S.O.36.No.F.12(59)FD/Tax/2014-14  dated  14th July,

2014, the RVAT was amended to include, in Schedule V, a separate Entry

under item No.19(viii) ‘gypsum board and other false ceiling material’.  Thus,

the legislature by a conscious decision in 2014, sought to create a separate

Entry for gypsum board, which was not the case in respect of the assessment

years in question.  This, in our view, belies the endeavor to include gypsum

board in the residuary Entry,  before such specific inclusion as then there

would have been no need for  such an Entry.   The obvious attempt  is  to

exclude it from ‘gypsum in all its forms’ in Schedule IV of RVAT and create a

separate Entry in Schedule V, whereafter it would naturally be governed by

the tax rate applicable to the Entry in question.   

22. We, thus, dismiss the appeals leaving it open to the parties to bear

their own costs.

…….………………………….CJI. [RANJAN GOGOI]   

…..……………………………….J.                                                                           [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL]

…..……………………………….J.                                   [K. M. JOSEPH]

NEW DELHI. JANUARY 08, 2019.

17