Holding

The storage vats are covered by the Uttar Pradesh Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959 because their volume is used for the assessment of excise duty, making the Act applicable.

Summary

Mohan Meakins Breweries Ltd., a liquor manufacturer, was served notices by the Inspector of Weights and Measures to have its storage vats verified, calibrated and stamped under the Uttar Pradesh Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959. The company contended that the Act did not apply to vats used merely for storage before sale, arguing that the definition of "use in transaction for trade or commerce" required actual trade activity. The High Court rejected this view, holding that the Act applied to the vats, and the Supreme Court affirmed that decision. The Court interpreted Section 2(jj) of the Act to give an extended meaning, covering any use of measures for determining quantities in connection with the assessment of excise duty, which includes storage vats whose volume is measured for duty calculation. Subsequent notifications extending the Act’s applicability to all relevant undertakings reinforced this interpretation. Consequently, the notices were deemed valid and the appeals were dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959 apply to storage vats used by a liquor manufacturer for holding liquor prior to sale.
Whether the definition of "use in transaction for trade or commerce" under Section 2(jj) includes activities related to the assessment of excise duty.
Whether the notifications of 1961, 1962 and 1967 limit the Act’s applicability only to the point of sale.

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Excise Act
Uttar Pradesh Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959s. 10, s. 2(jj), s. 7

Subjects

Weights and MeasuresCalibrationStorage vatsExcise dutySection 2(jj) definitionStatutory interpretationUttar PradeshLiquor manufacturing

Judgment

MOHAN MEAKINS BREWERIES LTD. DALIGANJ
A
LUCKNOW ETC.
• v.
CONTROLLER OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES,
U.P. LUCKNOW & ORS.

JANUARY 31, 1989 . B

[K.N. SINGH AND KULDIP SINGH, JJ.I

U.P. Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959: Section 2
(jj)-'Use in transaction for trade orcommerce'-Vats used for Storing
liquor-Notice issued for getting vats verified, · calibrated and C
stamped-Whether valid Act-Whether applicable to manufacturer of
liquor.

The appellants, were engaged in mannfactnte and sale of liquor,
under licence granted to them under the U.P. Excise Act. They installed
vats in their Breweries' premises for the storage of liquor. The liquor D
stored in vats was bottled and sold under the supervision of officers of
the Excise Department. The Inspector of Weights and Measnres issued
notices to them for getting their vats verified, calibrated and stamped in
accordance with the provisions of the U.P Weights and Measures
(Enforcement) Act, 1959. The appellants filed appeals against the
notices issned by the Inspector on the gronnd that the provisions ot the E
Act were not applicable to the appeilants' undertaking, manufacturing
alcohol. The appeals were dismissed by the Respondent-Controller of
Weights and measures. The appellants filed writ petitions before the
High Court challenging the orders of the respondents.

The High Conrt dismissed the petitions holding that the provi· F
sions of the Act and the Notifications issued therennder were applicable
to the manufacturers of liquor in the distillery, and the notices issued by
the respondents for the calibration of the storage vats were legal and
valid. ·

Aggrieved, the appellants filed appeals by special leave in this G
Court contending that the High Court committed error in holding that
the storage vats were required to be calibrated under the provisions of
the Act, that the provisions of the Act would apply if measures were
used for transaction in trade and commerce, but keeping alcohol in
storage vats did not amount to transactions in trade ot toilllnerce, and
that unless the storage vats were used in transaction i'ot trade aod H
375
376 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1989] 1 S.C.R. .,

commerce, the provisions of the Act were not attracted.
A
Dismissing the appeals,

HELD: 1.1 Under the definition clause in s. 2(jj) of the U.P.
Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959, the legislature has
B given an artificial extended meaning to the expression "use in trans-
action for trade or commerce". According to the definition it means use
for the purposes of determining or declaring the quantity of anything in
terms of measurement of length or capacity or weight in or in connec-
tion with th~ els. (a) a'!d (b) mentioned therein. ClalJse (b) refers to any
assessment of royalty; toll; duty or other dues. Thus, accor!ling to t!ie
extended meaning, the provisions of the Act would be attracted if the
c assessment of royalty; toll; duty or dues is to be determined on the basis
of tlJ~ quantity of ljnything in terms of measlJrement of lfngt!i, prep,
VOll!me or weight. [379C-EI

1.2 There is uo dispute that for the purposes of determiping
D excise duty on the liquor produced by a manufacturer, the assessment is
made on the basis of the volume of the liquor produced and sold. Since
volume of the liquor produced and stored in vats is connected with the
assessment of excise duty, it is covered by the expression "use in trans-
action for trade or commerce". [379E-F]

E 1.3 Ordinarily, the storage of alcohol in vats by itself may not
amount to transaction for trade or commerce but under the extended
meaning of the expression under s. 2(jj), even the storage of liquor in •
vats would be covered by the expression "use in transaction for trade or
commerce" as volume of the· liquor is necessary to be determined in
connection with the assessment of excise duty. [379F-GI
F
l.4 The alcohol stored in the storage vats is essentially for the
purpose of sale and there is no dispute that the appellants manufacture
and store alcohol in storage vats for the purpose of sale, and the officers
of the Excise Department measure storage vats as prescribed by Rule
751 of the Excise Manual, Volume I. Since the volume of the storage
G vats is measured by the officers of the Excise Department, the provi-
sions of the Act for the purpose of sale would be applicable to the
storage vats also. [380F-G f .

By Notification dated 19.8.1961 the provisions of the Act were
made applicable to an undertaking engaged in the manufacture and sale
H of alcohol with effect from October 1, 1961. Any doubts about the
MOHAN MEAKINS v. CONTROLLER OFWEIGIITS & MEASURES [SINGH, J.]377

applicability of the provisions of the Act stood removed by the subse-
-+- quent Notifications dated May 17, 1962 and July 18, 1967, maldng the
A
provisions of the Act applicable to all the undertakings in so far as they
relate to units of capacity in respect of those classes of undertakings to
which the Act has been made applicable. [380E, H; 381A)

Therefore, having regard to the above facts the High Court was B
~ right in holding that the storage vats were covered by the provisions of
the Act. [381B)

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 506

'
of 1989Etc.

From the Judgment and Qtder dated 5.12.1986 of the Allahabad c
High Court in C.M.W.P. No. 207of1980.
"" Dr. L.M. Singhvi and R .. B. Mehrotra for the Appellants.

Anil Dev Singh and_ Mrs. S. Dikshit for the Respondents. D

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

·;a, SINGH, J. Special leave granted.

The appellants are engaged in the business of manufacture and E
sale of Indian made foreign liquor and country liquor, under licence
-" granted to them under the Provisions of U.P. Excise Act. The appel-
Janis have installed vats in their Breweries' premises for the storage of
liquor. The liquor stored in vats is bottled and sold under the supervi-

t sion of officers of the Excise Department. The Inspector of Weights
and Measures issued notices to the appellants calling upon them to get F
their vats verified, calibrated and stamped in accordance with the pro-
visions of the U.P. Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1959,
(hereinafter referred to as the Act). The appellants preferred appeals
against the notice issued by the Inspector on the ground that the provi-
sion of the Act were not applicable to the appellants' undertaking,
manufacturing alcohol but the appeal was dismissed by the Controller G
of Weights and Measures. The appellants made petitions under Article
·-....l 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Allahabad challeng-
ing the orders of the respondents. Before the High Court the appel-
!ants contended that the provisions of the Act were attracted to the
appellants' undertaking only at the stage of sale and anything done in
the process of manufacture and storage of liquor could not be H

.,
378 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1989] I S.C.R.
A subjected to the provisions of the Act and the notice issued by the
Inspector of Weights and Measures was without any authority of law.
It was further urged that the calibration of vats storing liquor was not
necessary and the direction issued by the respondents was without any
authority of law. Similar petitions were filed by the manufacturers of
B Synthetic Rubber and Campher. All the three sets of petitions were
disposed of by a Division Bench of the High Court by a common
judgment and order dated December 5, 1985. The Division Bench
allowed the petitions filed by the Manufacturers of Synthetic Rubber
and Campher but it dismissed the petitions filed by the manufacturers
of liquor on the finding that the provisions of the Act and the Notifica-
tion issued thereunder are applicable to the manufacturers of liquor in ·
c the distillery and the notices issued by the respondents for the calibra-
tion of the storage vats were legal and valid. Aggrieved the appellants
have preferred the present petitions for special leave to appeal.

Dr. L.M. Singhvi, learned counsel for the appellants urged that
D the High Court committed error in holding that the storage vats are
required to be calibrated under the provisions of the Act. He added
that the provisions of the Act would apply if measures are used for
transaction in trade and commerce, but keeping alcohol in storage vats
does not amount to transactions in trade or commerce. Learned
counsel emphasised that unless the storage vats are used in transaction
E for trade and commerce the provisions of the Act would not be
attracted. In order to appreciate the contention, we would briefly refer
to the relevant provisions of the Act.

Section 7 of the Act imposes prohibition on use of weights and
measures other than standard weights and measures. It provides that
F no unit of mass or measure, other than the standard weights or mea-
sures shall be used in any transaction for trade or commerce or any
dealing or contract or for any work to be done or goods to be sold or
delivered. Section 10 further1imposes prohibition on the sale or use of
unstamped commercial or measuring instrument in trade or commerce
unless it has been verified or reverified and stamped in the prescribed
G manner by an Inspector with stamp of verification. These provisions
impose legislative prohibition that no weight or measure or weighing
or measuring instrument shall be used or be kept for use in any trans-
action for trade or commerce or for being sold, unless it has been
verified by the Inspector of the Department in the prescribed manner.
Section 2(jj) defines the expression "use in transaction for trade or
H commerce" which is as follows:
MOHAN MEAKINS v. CONlROLLER OF WEIGHTS & MEASURES [SINGH, J.}379

"2(jj) use in transaction for trade or commerce-with its
grammatic31 variation and Cognate expressions, means use A
for the purposes of determining or declaring the quantity of
anyting in terms of measurement of length, area, volume,
capacity or weight in or in connection with

(a) any contract, whether by way of sale, purchase, B
exchange or otherwise, or

(b) any assessment of royalty; toll; duty or other dues' or

(c) the assessment of any work done or services rendered,
otherwise than in relation to research or scientific studies
or in individual households for house-holds purposes" c
Under the aforesaid definition clause the legislature has given an
artificial extended meaning to the expression "use in transaction for
trade or commerce". According to the definition it means use for the
purposes of determining or declaring the quantity of anything in terms o
of measurement of length or capacity or weight in or in connection with
the clauses (a) and (b) mentioned therein. Clause (b) refers to any
assessment of royalty; toll; duty or other dues. According to the ex-
tended meaning given by the legislature the provisions of the Act
would be attracted if the assessment of royalty; toll; duty or dues is to
be determined on the basis of the quantity of anything in terms of E
measurement of length, area, volum or weight. there is no dispute that
- for the purposes of determining excise duty on the liquor produced by
a manufacturer the assessment is made on the basis of the volume of ·
the liquor produced and sold by the appellants. Since volume of the

t liquor produced and stored in vats is connected with the assessment of
excise duty, it is covered by the expression "use in transaction for F
trade or commerce". Ordinarily, the storage of alcohol in vats by itself
I may not amount to transaction for trade or commerce but under the
extended meaning of the expression under Section 2(jj) even the stor-
age of liquor in vats would be covered by the expression "use in trans-
action for trade or commerce" as volume of the liquor is necessary to
be determined in connection with the assessment of excise duty. We G
are, therefore, in agreement with the view taken by the High Court.

The learned counsel for the appellants urged that the High Court
failed to consider the effect of Notification dated 28.8.1961 which
made the provisions of the Act applicable to an undertaking engaged
in the manufacture of alcohol at the stage of sale only. Tue ]\lotifica- H
tion is as under: ·
380 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1989] 1 S.C.R.

NOTIFICATION
A
"KHADYA TATHA RASAD VIBHAG NOTIFICATION
NO. UPWM-1(3)-28-2401/XXIX-D-524-58 dated August
19, 1961, published in U.P. Gazette, Part I, dated 25th
August, 1961, page 1537.
B
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of
Section 1 of the Uttar Pradesh Weights and Measures
(Enforcement) Act, 1959 (U.P. Act No. V of 1959), the
Governor of Uttar Pradesh is pleased to appoint the first
day of October, 1961, as the date on which the provisions
.··~
of the said Act shall come into force in the whole of Uttar
c Pradesh in respect of:

(a) Undertaking engaged in the manufacture of alcohol in
so far as they undertake the sale of alcohol; and

D (b) Departments of Government in so far as they under-
take the levy of duties of excise on alcohol."

By the aforesaid Notification the provisions of the Act were
made applicable to an undertaking engaged in the manufacture and
· sale of alcohol with effect from October 1, 1961. Emphasis was laid by
E the learned counsel for the appellants on the expression "in so far as
they undertake the sale of alcohol". He urged that provisions of the
Act occurring in the aforesaid Notification have been made applicable
to the appellants' undertaking at the point of sale of alcohol. Before
the sale of alcohol the provisions of the Act are not attracted and as
such the storage vats cannot be required to be calibrated under the
F law. Having given our anxious consideration to the question, we do
not find any merit in the submission. The alcohol stored in the storage
vats is essentially for the purpose of sale and there is no dispute that the
appellants manufacture and store alcohol in storage vats for the
purposes of sale. There is further no dispute that the officers of the
Excise Department measure storage vats as prescribed by Rule 751 of
G the Excise Mannual, Volume 1. Since the volume of the storage vats is
measured by the officers of the Excise Department, the provisions of
the Act for the purpose of sale would be applicable to the storage vats
also. But if there be any doubt about the applicability of the provisions
of the Act the same stood removed by the subsequent Notifications
dated May 17, 1962 and July 18, 1967. Under these Notifications the
H provisions of the Act have been made applicable to all the under-
MOHAN MEAKJNS v. CONfROLLER OF WEIGHTS & MEASURES [SINGH, J.[381

+ takings in so far as they relate to units of capacity in respect of those
clauses of undertakings to which the Act has been made applicable.
A

Having regard to these facts the High Court, in our opinion, was right
in holding that the storage vats are covered by the provisions of the
Act.
B
Learned counsel for the appellants then urged that excise duty is
~ assessed at the point of sale as held by the High Court of Allahabad in
,i Mis Mohan Meakins Breweries v. State of U.P., [1979] U.P. Tax Cases
1048, therefore, provisions of the Act are applicable to the issue vats

•
only and no calibration is necessary for the storage vats. We find no
merit in the submission. In the aforesaid decision the High Court held
that under the provisions of the U .P. Excise Act excise duty is a charge c
essentially on the production or manufacture of an excisable article but
for administrative convenience it is imposed at a stage subsequent to
~
the stage of manufacture. This itself would make it clear that produced
material is the subject matter of excise duty, even though the assess-
ment of duty is done at the point of sale for convenience sake. The
storage of alcohol is required to be measured by the officers of the D
Excise Department under the provisions of the Excise Manual to
ensure that there is no pilferage or unauthorised removal of alcohol as
that would adversely affect the assessment of duty. Storage vats are
intimately connected with the assessment of excise duty, therefore
~
provisions of the Act are applicable to storage vats also.
E
We are, therefore, of the opinion that no exception can be taken
to the view taken by the High Court. The appeals fail and the same are
accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

f. N.P.V. Appeals dismissed.
F