M. B. SHAH, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner who is Regional Secretary of Food Corporation of India Employees Union has filed this petition wherein he has prayed that respondent No. 1 - Senior Regional Manager Food the arrears of salary which are paid of the employees on the basis of pay revision and revision of dearness allowance for the period commencing form 1/08/1983 to 31/07/1987 in pursuance of the settlement dated 22/03/1989 The arrears of salary and dearness allowance are required to be paid form August 198 3/03/1989. ( 2 ) MR. Raval learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently submitted that the Gujarat State Tax on Professions Trades Calling and Employments Act 1976 nowhere provides for deduction of professional tax on arrears of salary which are to be paid in lump sum and not on the regular basis. For this purpose he relies upon Sec. 2 (g) of the Act which reads as under. salary on wage includes pay or wages dearness allowance and all other remunerations received by any person on regular basis whether payable in cash or kind and also include perquisites and profits in lieu of salary as defined in Sec. 17 of the Income-tax Act 1969 he further relied upon the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd. v. The Assistant Profession Tax Officer Mangalore 1 AIR 1989 Kar 204 wherein the Court had held that the definition of salary or wages used in the section does not include arrears of salary. ( 3 ) AS against this Mr. Thakkar learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 vehemently submitted that the lump sum amount which is paid to the employees is difference of salary per month which was required to be paid to the employee from August 1983 onwards. He further referred to Schedule I of the Act which provides rates of tax on Professions Trades Callings and Employments. ( 4 ) FOR deciding this controversy it would be necessary to refer to Sec. 3 of the Act which is a charging Section which reads as under :3 (1) Subject to the provisions of Art 276 of the Constitution and of this Act there shall be levied and collected a tax on professions trade calling and employments for the benefit of the State. (2) Every person engaged is any profession trade calling or employments and falling under one or the and collected a tax on professions trade calling and shall be liable to pay to the State Government the tax at the rate mentioned against the class of such person in column 3 of the said Schedule ;provided that the tax so payable in respect of any one person shall not exceed two hundred an fifty rupees in any year; provided further that entry 9 in Schedule I shall only to such classes of persons as may be specified by the State Government by notification in the Official Gazette from time to time. (Emphasis added) Explanation I - where any salary or wages are payable according to any period other than a month the monthly salary or wages shall for the purpose of this entry be reckoned on the basis of the actual amount of salary or wages paid or payable for a month. (Emphasis added) admittedly the members of the petitioner-Union are employees of the respondent-Food Corporation of India. ( 5 ) SECTION 4 of the Act provides that it would be the employers liability to deduct and pay tax on behalf of the employees on the basis of salary or wage before such salary or wages is paid to the employee. It also provides that such employer shall irrespective of whether such deduction has been made or not when the salary or wage is paid to such person be liable to pay tax on behalf of all such persons. Reading Secs. 3 and 4 together it can be said that every person engaged in any profession trade calling or employment falling under one or other class mentioned in column No. 1 of Schedule I is required to pay tax at the rate mentioned in the said Schedule. I is required to employee his salary or wages. Further even if the employer fails to deduct the tax form salary or wage yet it is the liability of the employer to pay tax on behalf of all employees. ( 6 ) THE question in this petition is whether the arrears of salary which the petitioner are getting would be covered by the provisions of Sec. 3 read with Schedule I of the Act or not. ( 6 ) THE question in this petition is whether the arrears of salary which the petitioner are getting would be covered by the provisions of Sec. 3 read with Schedule I of the Act or not. The word arrears of salary itself indicates that the amount which was required to be paid as salary on due date was not paid to the concerned employees but is paid subsequently. That means the part of the salary or the salary which was required to be paid every month was not paid at that time. The definition given in Law Lexicon of the word arrears is as under:arrears. Money not paid on the due date or proper time for payment (u) arrears of rent (Connell) that which is behind in payment or which remains unpaid though due. The definition of arrears involves the idea not merely of money unpaid but of money unpaid at the due time. the term arrears involves the existence of same default on the part of the debtor. Therefore the amount which is paid to the petitioners is paid as salary which was required to be paid to them on the due date. As it is part of the salary the respondents are required to deduct it from the employees salary under Sec. 4 of the Act. ( 7 ) HOWEVER Mr. Raval learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the words salary or wage are defined under Sec. 2 (g) of the Act and it only provides that salary or wage includes pay or wages dourness allowance and all other remuneration received by any person on regular basis. As the petitioners are not getting arrears of salary on regular basis therefore arrears of salary cannot be included and said to be part of the salary for which tax can be deducted. ( 8 ) IN my view this submission cannot be accepted. Arrears of salary is paid to the employee on the ground that employees were entitled to have that amount of salary for particular month of months on regular basis but that amount was not paid to them on due date or dates. Therefore arrears of salary is a part of the salary which was required to be paid to the employees every month. It is true that in the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd. v. Asstt. Therefore arrears of salary is a part of the salary which was required to be paid to the employees every month. It is true that in the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd. v. Asstt. Profession Tax Officer AIR 1989 Kar 204 the Karnataka High Court has held that as the arrears of salary is not included in the section which defines salary or wage and as it is included in the Income-tax Act therefore no tax on arrears or salary can be levied. With respect it is difficult to accept the said proposition. By inclusive definition the meaning of salary or wage is extended but that does not mean that it has limited its ordinary meaning. Its ordinary meaning is retained. Only its scope is widened. From this inclusive definition it cannot he said that the Legislature has provided that salary or wage would only mean what is stated while giving extended meaning. While retaining the ordinary meaning by including certain aspects extended meaning is given to the said words The word includes is a word of enlargement rather than restriction and it cannot be taken to be exhaustive considering the context in which it is used in Sec. 2 of the Act. As stated above arrears of salary is part of the salary which was required to be paid to the employee on its due date but was not paid for some reasons. Because arrears are paid after some time it would not lose its character of a salary. In any set of circumstances the Explanation to Schedule I specifically provides that where any salary or wages are payable according to any period other than a month the monthly salary or wages shall for the purpose of this entry be reckoned on the basis of the actual amount of salary or wages paid or payable for a month. So this Explanation would take care of the situation where arrears or salary is paid after lapse of some period. In the Affidavit-in-reply it has been pointed out that Class III and IV employees are paid revised payscale dearness allowance and other benefits from 1/08/1983 as per the Memorandum dated 14/01/1989 That means that from August 1983 the employees were required to be paid certain amount as salary regularly every month but it was not paid and is paid as arrears of salary. ( 9 ) HENCE the action of respondent No. 1 of deducting professional tax amount from the arrears of salary cannot be said to be in any way arbitrary or illegal and therefore there is no question of directing respondent No. 1 or 2 to remand the said amount. In this view of the matter there is no substance in this petition and it is rejected. Notice discharged. (KMV) Rule discharged. .