J.P. GUPTA VS COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, 1998 PTD-MADHYA-PRADESH-HIGH-COURT-INDIA 1154 (1995)

(a) Wealth tax---

----Exemption---Law books in library of a lawyer---Entitled to exemption under S.5(1)(xii) and not as tools and instruments under S.5(l)(x) --- Indian Wealth Tax Act, 1957, S.5(1).

In section 5(1) (xii) of Wealth Tax Act, 1957, the items "books and manuscripts" are mentioned after the items "works of art, archaeological, scientific or art collections". It cannot be held that books and manuscripts are qualified by the adjective or take colour from the items, such as works of art, archaeological, scientific or art collections. The rule of ejusdem generis cannot be applied, looking to the nature of the items and the manner in which they are enumerated in sub-clause (xii) of section 5(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957.

CWT v. S.N. Kacker (1989) 175 ITR 129 (All.) and CWT v. A.K. Sen (1991) 187 ITR 338 (Delhi) fol.

Held, that "books and manuscripts" which are separately mentioned in clause (xii) cannot, by implication, be included in clause (x) under the words "tools and instruments", as in their ordinary meaning "books and manuscripts" are not included in those words. The law books in the library of an Advocate would be covered by section 5(1)(xii) and not section 5(1)(x) of the Act.

(b) Interpretation of statutes--

Scope of doctrine of ejusdem generis not applicable. R.D. Jain for the Commissioner. Assessee in person.

JUDGMENT

D.M. DHARMADHIKARI, J.---The following questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal to this Court at the instance of the assessee under section 27 of the Wealth Tax Act 1957:

"(1) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that books forming part of the library of an Advocate were outside the purview of 'books' as contemplated in section 5(1)(xii) of the Wealth Tax Act?

(2) Whether books forming part of the library of an Advocate would tantamount to tools and instruments as stated under section 5(1)(x) of the Wealth Tax Act?"

The relevant provisions of the Wealth Tax Act containing exemptions from wealth tax in relation to certain specified assets, partially or wholly, for decision of the question referred to us are as under:

"5. Exemptions in respect of certain assets.---(1) Subject to the provisions of subsection (1-A), wealth tax shall not be payable by an assessee in respect of the following assets, and such assets shall not be included in the net wealth of the assessee...

(x) the tools and instruments necessary to enable the assessee to carry on his profession or vocation, subject to a maximum of fifty thousand rupees in value...

(xii) any works of art, archaeological, scientific or art collections, books or manuscripts belonging to the assessee and not intended for sale."

The questions raised require interpretation and reasonable construction to be put on the provisions of clauses (x) and (xii) of the Act quoted above. The question is whether the law books in the library of an Advocate can be described as falling within the items "tools and instruments" as mentioned in clause (x) or they fall within the term "books or manuscripts" as mentioned in clause (xii) of subsection (1) of section 5 of the Act.

No doubt, an Advocate or a lawyer requires law books to ably carry on this profession. Can it, therefore, be said that the law books in his library are "his tools and instruments"? The law books, as such, do not fall within the ordinary meaning of "tools and instruments".

The items "books and manuscripts" are included in clause (xii), which are mentioned after' to the items preceding in that clause, such as, "works of art, archaeological, scientific or art collections". It cannot be held that books and manuscripts are qualified by the adjective or take colour from the items, such as, art, archaeological, scientific or art collections. The rules of ejusdem generic cannot be applied looking to the nature of the items and the manner they are enumerated in clause (xii).

The assessee is an Advocate and appeared for his own case. He relied on a Division Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court reported in CWT v. S.N. Kacker (1989) 175 ITR 129, and another Division Bench decision of the Delhi High Court reported in CWT v. A.K. Sen (1991) 187 ITR 338. In both the above decisions, it has been held that books and manuscripts are covered by clause (xii) and the rule of ejusdem generis cannot be made applicable to several items mentioned therein. Respectfully following the decisions (supra) of the above Court for the additional reasons mentioned above, we are also of the opinion that "books and manuscripts" may be possessed by an Advocate or a lawyer and are not covered by the words "tools and instruments" mentioned in clause (x). The law books of a lawyer enable him to acquire knowledge of law for carrying on his profession. They cannot, however, be termed as "his tools and instruments" as may be typing machines, fax machines, computers, etc., used in carrying on the profession. We are clearly of the opinion that "books and manuscripts" which are separately mentioned in clause (xii) cannot, by implication, be included in clause (x) under the words "tools and instruments", as in its ordinary meaning "books and manuscripts" are not included in those words.

For the reasons aforesaid, the two questions referred are answered in the negative, against the Department and in favour of the assessee by holding that the law books to the library of an Advocate would be covered or section 5(1)(xii) and not section 5(1)(x) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957.

M.B.A.1440/FCQuestion answered in negative.