Judgment :- Balanarayana Marar, J. Common question arises in these three tax revision cases. The question is whether glass bottles and phials come under Entry 111 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales-tax Act and exigible to tax at 10% of the sales turnover or only at the general rate applicable to unclassified items. 2. Respondent in T.R.C. 113/90 and T.R.C.114/90 is a dealer in aluminium goods, plastic goods, empty bottles etc. at a Corpora lion building at Kozhikode. For the years 1983-84 and 1984-85 he was assessed to sales-tax. The assessing authority levied tax on the turnover of empty bottles and phials sold by the respondent at 10% treating the same as "glass ware" coming under item 1U of the First Schedule to K.G,S.T. Act. On appeal the appellate Assistant Commissioner concurred with the assessing authority. The assessee preferred second appeal as T.A. 579 and 580 of 1988 before the Sales-tax appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode. As per a common order in those appeals the Tribunal held that empty bottles and phia's are not items coming under Entry 111 of the First Schedule and that they are not glass ware. It was further held that the sales-tax turnover of the said items is taxable only at the rate applicable to unclassified items, i.e. at the general rate provided under the K.G.S.T. Act. That order is assailed by the revenue in the tax revision cases 113/90 and 114/90. 3. Respondent in T.R.C. 40/91 is a dealer in empty bottles, corks etc. at Kozhikode. He was assessed to sales-tax for the year 1985-86 on a taxable turnover of Rs. 4,78,930/-. The assessee questioned the rate of tax levied on the turnover of empty bottles in first appeal before the Additional Appellant Assistant Commissioner, Kozhikode. The order of 'the assessing authority was confirmed in appeal. The Sales-tax appellate Tribunal on second appeal adopted their r earlier decision in T. A. Nos. 579 and 580 of 1988 dated 12-7-1989 and held that empty glass bottles are not glass ware attracting higher rate of tax at 10%. The assessing authority was directed to modify the assessment levying tax on the turnover of empty glass bottles at 5%. The department has come up in revision. 4. Since the same question arises in these three revisions they were heard jointly. 5. Sri. The assessing authority was directed to modify the assessment levying tax on the turnover of empty glass bottles at 5%. The department has come up in revision. 4. Since the same question arises in these three revisions they were heard jointly. 5. Sri. N.N. Divakara Pillai, Senior Government Pleader urged before us that glass bottles and phials come under I he category of "glass ware" and exigible to sales-tax under Entry 111 of the K.G.S.T. Act. According to the counsel, glassware includes every article made of glass. The word 'glassware' is not defined in the Act. The dictionary meaning of glass ware is relied on by the counsel in support of his contention. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent- assessee contended that the meaning of the word 'glassware' in common parlance has to be adopted in the absence of any definition in the enactment. Counsel would point out that glass bottles and phials are not understood in common? .lance as glassware. The main aspect which falls for consideration is whether "glassware" includes glass bottles and phials for the purpose of levying tax under Entry 111 of the K.G.S.T. Act. 6. The principles to be followed while interpreting items in statutes like the Excise Tax Acts or Sales Tax Acts had been laid down by the Supreme Court in the decision in Indo International Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax - 47 S.T.C. 359. the Supreme Court held that resort should be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of the terms or expressions used, but to their popular meaning, that is to say. the meaning attached to them by those dealing in them. The Supreme Court further held that if any term or expression has been defined in the enactment then it must be understood in the sense in which it is defined. In the absence of any such definition the meaning of the term in common parlance or commercial. Parlance has to be adopted. In that case a question arose whether clinical syringes manufactured and sold by the assessee could be considered as "glassware" railing within entry 39 of the First Schedule to the U.P. Sales Tax Act 1948 or whether they fell under "hospital equipment". Parlance has to be adopted. In that case a question arose whether clinical syringes manufactured and sold by the assessee could be considered as "glassware" railing within entry 39 of the First Schedule to the U.P. Sales Tax Act 1948 or whether they fell under "hospital equipment". After referring to the dictionary meaning of the expression "glassware" in Webster's New World Dictionary where it is defined as "articles made of glass" the Supreme Court observed that in commercial sense glass ware would never comprise articles like clinical syringes, thermometers, lactometers and the like which have specialised significance and utility. Those articles though made of glass are normally available in medical stores, or with the manufacturers thereof. It is observed by the Supreme Court that it is unlikely that a consumer would ask for such articles from a glass ware shop. In that view the Supreme Court held that clinical syringes cannot be considered as glass ware. 7. The Supreme Court in that decision had referred to an earlier decision of the Supreme Court in Ramavatar Budhaiprasad v. Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Akola 12 S.T.C. 286. A question arose whether betel leaves are vegetables or not. It was held that the word 'Vegetables" in taxing statutes has to be understood as in common parlance, i.e. denoting class of vegetables which are grown in a kitchen garden or in a farm and are used for the table. Vegetable is defined in Shorter Oxford Dictionary as "of or pertaining to, comprised or consisting of, or derived, or obtained from plants or their parts". If construed in a technical sense the definition may include betel leaves also. The Supreme Court held that the word must be construed not in any technical sense nor from the botanical point of view but as understood in common parlance. The word vegetable was not defined in C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 which came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in that case. It was observed that being a word of every day use the word vegetable must be construed in its proper sense meaning "that sense which people conversant with the subject matter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it". 8. It was observed that being a word of every day use the word vegetable must be construed in its proper sense meaning "that sense which people conversant with the subject matter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it". 8. The question whether thermometers, lactometers, syringes, eyewash glasses and measuring glasses come within the meaning of expression 'glassware 'was considered by the Orissa High Court in State of Orissa v. Janata Medicat Stores - 37 S.T.C. 33. It was observed that in popular sense glass ware would ordinarily refer to articles made of glass. But in general use when glassware is referred to one's mind, thermometers, lactometers, syringes or eye-wash glasses or even measuring glasses do not occur. It is further observed that a general merchant dealing in glass ware ordinarily does not deal in these articles, whereas these are articles which are normally available in a medical shop. In this view of the matter it was held that thermometers, lactometers etc. do not come within the meaning of the expression 'glassware'. 9. Reliance is also placed on the decision in Mahalakshmi Traders v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - 53 S.T.C. 263. The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that bangles are only general goods and not glass ware. An earlier bench decision of the same High Court in Shankar Bangle Stores v. State of Andhra Pradesh (writ petitions Nos. 5100 and 3853 of 1975) was followed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. That decision is shown as an appendix at page 264 of 53 S.T.C. The relevant entry in the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act is entry 123 which reads: "glassware, bottles". It was observed that bangles are certainly. not bottles and the word "glassware" as ordinarily understood, apart from the pure dictionary meaning is something which is to do with tableware like glasses, glass dishes etc. Reference is seen made to an order of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Hyderabad wherein it was held that glass sheets are not glassware for the purpose of sales tax law and that decision of the Tribunal had been accepted by the Government and has not been challenged in any manner. 10. Reference is seen made to an order of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Hyderabad wherein it was held that glass sheets are not glassware for the purpose of sales tax law and that decision of the Tribunal had been accepted by the Government and has not been challenged in any manner. 10. The question whether glass mirror can be classified as "other glass and glassware" set forth in item 23A(4) of Schedule I to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was considered by the Supreme Court in Atul Glass Industries (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise - 63 S.T.C. 322. The Supreme Court held that glass mirrors cannot be held to be "glass or glassware" under tariff item No. 23A (4). The Supreme Court laid down the test to be applied in such cases. The test is: How is the produce identified by the class or section of people dealing with or using the product? That is a test which is attracted whenever the statute does not contain 'any definition. The principle enunciated by the Supreme Court in Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan - 46 S.T.C. 256 at page 259 was quoted with approval by the Supreme Court in the decision in 63 S.T.C. 322 (supra). The passage reads "Now, in determining the meaning or connotation of words and expressions describing an article or commodity the turnover of which is taxed in a sales tax enactment, if there is one principle fairly well settled it is that the words or expressions must be construed in the sense in which they are understood in the trade, by the dealer and the consumer. It is they who are concerned with it, and it is the sense in which they understand it that constitutes the definitive index of the legislative intention when the statute was enacted". In the full bench decision of this court in Krishna Iyer v. State of Kerala -13 S.T.C. 838 the question for consideration was whether vegetables mentioned in the notification issued under General Sales Tax Act 1125 will take in "green ginger" also. While observing that "green ginger" is a vegetable if we go by the dictionary meaning of that word it was held that it is not the dictionary meaning of the term that will invariably prevail in the construction of a statute. While observing that "green ginger" is a vegetable if we go by the dictionary meaning of that word it was held that it is not the dictionary meaning of the term that will invariably prevail in the construction of a statute. The full bench held: "It is the rule that particular words used by the Legislature in the denomination of article should be understood according to the common commercial understanding of the term used and not in their scientific or technical sense, for, as stated in 9 Wheaten U.S.435, the Legislature does not suppose our merchants to be naturalists, or geologists or botanists". 10. in the light of the principles enunciated in the decisions aforementioned the meaning of the term 'glassware* has to be gathered from the trade practice or the common parlance in trade. In the absence of a definition in the Sales Tax Act the popular meaning or the meaning attached to glassware by persons who deal in that item has to be resorted to. In the circumstances, the dictionary meaning of the word 'glassware' does not lend any assistance to us to decide whether glassware includes glass bottles and phials. 11. Glassware as ordinarily understood is something to do with tableware like glass tumblers, glass dishes, plates -etc. Glass sheets, bangles and mirrors do not come under that category nor syringes, lactometers etc. It is common knowledge that glass bottles and phials are not ordinarily available in a glassware shop. The assessees are not running glassware shops whereas they are dealers in glass bottles, phials etc. From the order of the appellate Tribunal it is seen that the respondent in T.R.Cs.113 and 114 of 1990 is a dealer in aluminium goods, plastic goods, empty bottles, perfumes etc. Respondent in T.R.C. 40/91 is doing business in empty bottles, corks, perfumes etc. Neither of them is dealing in tableware which is commonly known as glassware. Glass bottles and phials are not usually sold in a glassware shop. Counsel for assessee points out that used bottles and phials are collected by the assessee and after cleansing them they are put to sale. Such articles are not available from a glassware shop and a consumer could not approach a glassware dealer for purchasing glass bottles and phials. Glass bottles and phials are not usually sold in a glassware shop. Counsel for assessee points out that used bottles and phials are collected by the assessee and after cleansing them they are put to sale. Such articles are not available from a glassware shop and a consumer could not approach a glassware dealer for purchasing glass bottles and phials. The word "glassware" has therefore to be understood according to its popular sense and when so understood it is clear that glass bottles and phials will not come within that term. No error has therefore been committed by the Tribunal in holding that empty bottles and phials sold by the assessees are not exigible to tax under Entry 111 of the First Schedule of the K.G.S.T. Act. 12. There is also indication in the K.G.S.T. Act itself to suggest that glass bottles and phials do not come within the meaning of the expression "glassware". It cannot be said that the Legislature was not unaware of the necessity of including glass bottles and phials in the entry since several other categories of glassware were included by the Finance Act of 1984. The original entry 111 reads: "glassware" only. While the Legislature wanted other items also to be included entries 111-A to 111-C were inserted by the Kerala Finance Act of 1984. Those entries read as follows: 111-A-- Glass sheets, wired glass and rolled glass. 111-b-- glass rods. -111-C-.-glass capillaries. Glass bottles and phials were not included ai I hat time. The relevant entry after the amendment of the First Schedule by Act IS of 1987 is entry No. 87 which reads: "glassware, glass sheets, wired glass and rolled glass, glass rods and glass capillaries". In otherwords, former entries 111 and 111-A to 111-C had been consolidated into one by that amendment. Even while substituting the First Schedule by the Amendment Act 18 of 1987 glass bottles and phials were not included. Had glass bottles and phials been intended to be included either by the Finance Act of 1984 or the Amendment Act 18 of 1987 the Legislature would have done so, especially since similar entries in sales tax enactments of other States contain glass bottles also. In the Karnataka enactment the relevant entry reads: "glassware and glass bottles". In the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act it reads: "glassware, bottles". In the Karnataka enactment the relevant entry reads: "glassware and glass bottles". In the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act it reads: "glassware, bottles". In the Rajasthan Act sales tax is exigible on 'other glass or glassware'. It would thus appear that glass bottles had been specifically mentioned when tax was intended to be levied under the Sales Tax Act. The mention of the words 'glass bottles' in the Karnataka enactment and the v ord 'bottles' in Andhra Pradesh Act is suggestive of the non-inclusion of glass bottles within the expression "glassware". What is exigible to tax under Entry 111 of the K.G.S.T. Act is only glassware. Glass bottles and phials do not come within that entry nor were they intended to be included. These tax revision cases are I therefore devoid of merit and are hereby dismissed.