JUDGMENT A. R. TIWARI, J. - At the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, the Appellate Tribunal (Board of Revenue) has referred the undernoted question of law under section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, for answer : "Whether, under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the tools, i.e., screwdrivers, saws, pickaxes, etc., are covered by the expression 'tool' occurring in item (ix) of clause (iv) of section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and should, therefore, be exigible to tax at 4 per cent being covered by entry 1 of Part I of Schedule II to the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 ?" 2. Facts lie in a narrow compass. The assessee-non-applicant carries on business at Indore of locks and tools. For the assessment year April 1, 1981 to March 31, 1982, the Sales Tax Officer passed the assessment order on June 29, 1983 (annexure "Ba") imposing the liability of sales tax at 10 per cent instead of 4 per cent and also imposed the penalty of Rs. 17,000 under section 43(1) of the aforesaid Act. The assessee filed the appeal before Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Indore, under section 38(1) of the aforesaid Act. The appellate authority maintained the order imposing sales tax at 10 per cent, but reduced the penalty by Rs. 1,500 by order dated October 11, 1984, passed in Appeal No. 331 of 1983/Provincial (annexure "Sa"). Thereafter, the assessee filed Second Appeal No. 323/PBR/84 before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue allowed the appeal in part by order dated April 24, 1985 and remanded the case for fresh assessment holding that screwdrivers, saws, pickaxes, etc., will fall within the ambit of definition of "tools" (annexure "Da"). The Commissioner of Sales Tax, then field an application seeking reference of the case. Accepting the same, the Tribunal referred the aforesaid question. 3. We have heard Shri K. K. Gupta, learned Government Advocate for the department. None appeared for the assessee. 4. Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, provides that the goods as enumerated therein are of special importance in inter-State trade or commerce. Accepting the same, the Tribunal referred the aforesaid question. 3. We have heard Shri K. K. Gupta, learned Government Advocate for the department. None appeared for the assessee. 4. Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, provides that the goods as enumerated therein are of special importance in inter-State trade or commerce. In clause (iv) substituted by Act No. 61 of 1972 with effect from April 1, 1973 dealing with iron and steel embraced vide item (ix) tool, alloy and special steels of any of the above categories. Hardware is taxable at 10 per cent. Certain tools covered by Schedule I are exempted from payment of tax and remaining tools are taxable at 4 per cent. The question is whether screwdrivers, saws, pickaxes are covered by the expression "tool" occurring in item (ix) of clause (iv) of section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and if so whether the same are exigible to tax at 4 per cent being covered by entry 1 of Part I of Schedule II of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act 1958. The assessee is doing the business of locks and tools. The dictionary meaning of word "tool" is an implement for mechanical operations, a thing used for a purpose, an instrument. Screwdrivers, saws, pickaxes etc., are obviously implements for mechanical operations and should naturally fall within the expression of "tool" as used in the Act. The Appellate Tribunal found that the assessing authority could have seen the bills and determined the turnover on account of hardware and tools, etc. It recorded the view that tools are covered under item (ix) of clause (iv) of section 14 of the Central Act, and that screwdrivers, saws and pickaxes, etc., come within the definition of "tools" 5. Screwdrivers etc., cannot be said to acquire different commercial identity and are thus, not liable to be put in the category other than "tools". In Civil Appeals Nos. 2025 and 2026, 2873 to 2875 and 1537 of 1986 (Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1989] 74 STC 176), the apex Court held that galvanised tubes are steel tubes within the meaning of section 14(iv)(xi) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Similarly, the articles, particularised in the question referred to us, are tools, and not hardware or anything else, within the meaning of section 14(iv)(ix) of the Act. Similarly, the articles, particularised in the question referred to us, are tools, and not hardware or anything else, within the meaning of section 14(iv)(ix) of the Act. The Tribunal has thus, not erred in law. The view taken by the Tribunal is manifestly in conformity with law. The words, affirmative and negative, to be appreciated properly to ensure smooth operation of the clause. 6. In Marbury v. Madison (1803) 1 Crauch 137, it was observed that : "Affirmative words are often, in their operations, negative of other objects than those affirmed, and in this case, a negative or exclusive sense must be given to them or they have no operation at all." 7. Stripped to its essentials, it may be stated that the department could not tell us as to how the articles are not "tools" and as to what other identity the same can carry. Fiscal provision is to be understood and interpreted strictly so as not to fall foul of article 265 of the Constitution of India. We have to clear the doubts. 8. It is in the area of legislative ambiguities, yet not receding, that courts have to fill gaps, clear doubts and mitigate hardships. In the words of judge learned Hand, spoken in Cabell v. Markham (1945) 148 F 2d 737 at page 739, we get enough light to locate correct path : "It is one of surest indexes of a mature and developed jurisprudence......to remember that statutes always have some purpose or object to accomplish whose sympathetic and imaginative discovery is the surest guide to their meaning." 9. In exercise of clearing doubts and mitigating hardships, we find that articles, as detailed, are nothing but tools within the provision of law and are thus, exigible at concessional rate. 10. The Government Advocate was unable to point out any infirmity in the conclusion reached by the Tribunal. We are satisfied with the correctness of the conclusion recorded by the Tribunal and do not find any error in the matter of interpretation. 11. As screwdrivers, saws and pickaxes do come within the definition of "tools", we answer the stated-question in the affirmative, i.e., against the department and in favour of the assessee. 12. The reference is answered accordingly leaving the parties to bear their own cots of this reference as incurred. 13. 11. As screwdrivers, saws and pickaxes do come within the definition of "tools", we answer the stated-question in the affirmative, i.e., against the department and in favour of the assessee. 12. The reference is answered accordingly leaving the parties to bear their own cots of this reference as incurred. 13. A copy of this order shall be transmitted to the Appellate Tribunal under the signature of the Registrar of this Court and seal of the High Court. Reference answered in the affirmative.