All That Looks Green Is Not A Vegetable

We all eat vegetables but if we are asked to define them, we may not be on a very firm ground. It is one of those concepts not amenable to easy definition. Had it not been so, it would not have been the subject matter of several cases in high courts and the Supreme Court. To begin with, we may ask ourselves why we should try to define the word vegetable. The simple reason is that there are exemptions in the fiscal laws in favour of vegetables.

The act of sale of vegetable does not attract sales tax. Therefore, when an assistant sales tax officer wanted to tax the sale of betel leaf, a vendor objected on the ground that betel leaf was a vegetable. He claimed exemption. To advance his argument, he relied on the dictionary meaning of vegetable in the Shorter Oxford Dictionary and text books on botany. This refers to the case of Ramavatar Budhiprashad vs Assistant Sales Tax Officer reported in AIR 1961 SC 1325 which has become a landmark judgement by the SC.

 

The SC did not accept the scientific or dictionary meaning of the word vegetable and observed that it must be construed not in any technical sense nor from a botanical point of view, but as understood in common parlance. It held: It has not been defined in the Act and being a word of everyday use it must be construed in its popular sense, meaning that sense which people conversant with the subject matter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it. It is to be understood as understood in common language. In this view, betel leaf was not a vegetable but a condiment. Not being a vegetable, it could not enjoy exemption from sales tax.

The judgement lays down the basic principle that a vegetable is one that in market parlance is known as such. This is the definition of vegetable for fiscal laws, but not so for students of botany who would regard betel leaf as a vegetable. So the definition depends upon who asks the question. For a botany student, betel leaf is a vegetable, but not so for a tax collector.

Even after this definition was available, controversies arose on other so-called vegetables too. Some which travelled upto the SC are coconut, green ginger, chilly, lemon etc. Coconut was the subject matter of the SCs decision in the case of P A Thillai Chidambar Nair vs State of Tamil Nadu reported in AIR 1985 SC 1644. In this case under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the question was whether a coconut (neither tender nor dried, but a ripened one with or without husk) could be exempted from sales tax. Justice V D Tulzapurkar and Justice Ranganath Misra held that it was well-known that the kernel of the coconut was used as an ingredient for enhancing the taste of food, but was hardly used as a substantial article of food on the table. On this ground, they held that it was not a vegetable.

However, Justice Sabyasachi Mukherjee observed that it could not be categorically said that ripened coconut could never be considered a vegetable. However, the assessee could not adduce enough evidence to prove it. He gave the legal verdict that the burden of proof that coconut was a vegetable was on the person who claimed it to be so. And since he was not able to discharge the burden of proof, it could not be regarded as a vegetable in law. On this basis, the SC finally decided that ripened coconut was not a vegetable.

Chilly and lemon were the subject matter of a decision by the SC in the case of Mangulu Sahu Ramahari Sahu vs Sales Tax Officer, Ganjam, Orissa reported in AIR 1974 SC 390. In this case, under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 the question was whether chillies and lemons were vegetables. The HC had held that they were not vegetables. It had gone on the basis that before an item could be considered a vegetable, it had to be a principal item of food. It also considered the botanical meaning of the word. The SC observed that technical or botanical meanings should not be considered for tax purposes. So while the HC said they were not vegetables, the SC said they were.

Green ginger came up for decision before the SC in the case of State of West Bengal vs Wasi Ahmed reported in AIR 1977 SC 1638. In a case under the Bengal Finance Sales Tax Act, the issue was whether green ginger was to be regarded as a vegetable as obtained in the description vegetable, green or dried, commonly known as sabji, tarkari or sak in item 6 of Schedule 1. If it was treated so, it would be exempt from sales tax. The SC relied on the fact that in common parlance green ginger was known as a vegetable. It was grown in the kitchen garden or in a farm and was used for the table. It did not accept the view of the Sales Tax Tribunal that it was a flavour.

From the above judgements we find that while the principle of market parlance has been uniformly adopted, the market definition of vegetable has not been uniformly accepted. While applying the definition, there has been some difference of opinion. In the case of coconut the definition of vegetable that has been accepted is that it has to be a main item of cooking. But that does not seem to have been the criterion in the case of ginger, chilly and lemon. After all ginger, chilly and lemon are also not main items, and are used to enhance the taste of cooked food. This can be true of coconut also. But it has been adjudged otherwise.

(The author is former member, Central Board of Excise and Customs)