SATISH CHANDRA, J. - (1.) THE Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Aligarh, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, can rice bran be included in the category of bhusi within the meaning of Notification No. ST-3471/X dated 16th July, 1956 ?"
(2.) THE assessee deals in rice bran and other commodities. In processing paddy the inner husk is separated and it is called by the name of polish or rice bran. According to the facts given in the statement of the case and in the revisional order, the rice bran is usually sold by the dealers as cattle fodder. It is also processed by the oil-mills for extracting oil. The assessee claimed that rice bran was exempt from sales tax by virtue of Notification No. ST-3471/X dated 16th July, 1956. The Sales Tax Officer repelled this claim. He held that rice bran was taxable as an unclassified item. This view was upheld in appeal. The assessee took the dispute in revision. The Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, held that rice bran is the inner husk of rice. It will be covered by the term bhusi as used in the relevant notification and so it will be exempt from tax. The notification dated 16th July, 1956, exempts from sales tax cattle fodder, which term is defined to include green fodder, chuni, bhusi, chhilka, chokar, cotton seed, gowar and oil-cake. In Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow v. Naveen Traders, Etawah ([1975] 36 S.T.C. 440; 1973 U.P.T.C. 215), a Division Bench of this Court has held that rice with its outer husk is known as paddy and after the husk is removed the product is known as rice. Rice does not have any inner husk. The rice bran in respect of which exemption was claimed was nothing but powdered rice. "Bhusa" and "bhusi"" as understood in common parlance are commodities obtained from stalk, leaves and husk of grains. "Rice bran" cannot be treated as "bhusi of rice". In view of this decision, the question referred to us has to be answered against the assessee.
(3.) ON behalf of the assessee it was urged that the claim that rice bran was cattle fodder as such because it was commercially used as cattle fodder was specifically raised before the Judge (Revisions), but he has not given any finding on it obviously because he accepted the claim of the assessee on the limited ground that rice bran was bhusi which was included in cattle fodder. A perusal of the order of the Judge (Revisions) shows that the dealer's claim was that rice bran was exempt from tax as it was cattle fodder. The definition of cattle fodder in the notification dated 16th July, 1956, is inclusive of green fodder, chuni, bhusi, chhilka, chokar, cotton seed, gowar and oil-cake. Evidently, if a commodity is not bhusi, chuni, chhilka, chokar, cotton seed, gowar or oil-cake, it will none the less be cattle fodder depending upon its characteristics and use. For the assessee reliance was placed upon Omrao Industrial Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd., Kanpur v. Sales Tax Officer, Kanpur ([1974] 33 S.T.C. 343) (Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2916 of 1973 decided on 12th November, 1973). In that case, it was held that de-oiled rice bran was cattle fodder. On the strength of this decision the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the question referred to us requires reframing. According to him the question should be reframed as follows : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, rice bran was cattle fodder within the meaning of Notification No. ST-3471/X dated 16th July, 1956 ?" ;