( 1 ) THE controversy in these appeals is regarding interpretation of entry 29 of the Fifth Schedule under which firewood or charcoal when sold for domestic use (except to hotels) have been exempted. The claim of the assessee was not accepted by the assessing authority. The appeal preferred before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), was allowed, where it was found that in later two years the assessing authority has himself given the exemption and a finding that firewood is sold to Central prison was given. ( 2 ) ACCORDING to the appellate authority unless the sale is made to the hotels, the tax could not be levied and since the sales were effected to Central prison, sales tax levied was set aside observing that the firewood and charcoal sold to domestic consumer or domestic use will not be liable to tax. ( 3 ) THE revising authority has taken altogether different view and observed that supplies are made to HAL and MPM Ltd. He was of the view that the supply to these public undertakings was for use in their canteens, which prepares the eatables and drinks for the workers of the company. It was observed that the intention of the Legislature is to give exemption only for domestic use. Reliance is placed on the judgment given in the case of Polestar Electronic (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner, Sales Tax AIR1978 SC 897 , (1978 )1 scc636 , [1978 ]3 SCR98 , [1978 ]41 STC409 (SC ), wherein it was observed that plain natural meaning of language used must prevail. No words should be added, altered or modified unless it is plainly necessary to do so in order to prevent a provision from unintelligible, absurd, unreasonable or totally irreconcilable with the rest of the statute. Observations made in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow v. Parson Tools and Plants, Kanpur AIR1975 SC 1039 , (1975 )4 SCC22 , [1975 ]3 SCR743 , [1975 ]35 stc413 (SC ), 1975 (7 )UJ267 (SC ) were also taken into consideration where it was held that where the language is plain and unambiguous, the court cannot supply any casus omissus on the basis of what it thinks to be a general principle of justice and equity. ( 4 ) ON behalf of the assessee it is submitted that the words "domestic purpose" and "domestic use" were considered in the case of J. Vamana Prabhu v. State of Mysore [1967] 20 STC 38 (Mys ). The words "domestic use" in its normal sense is a word of general application. The purpose or object of the use is what is indicated by the word "domestic" namely, the supplying of such services or comforts as, according to ordinary habits of civilised life, are commonly supplied in people's homes. We have considered over the matter. 4. The word "domestic" is derived from "domus" which means a house. In Nat Steel Equipment pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise AIR1988 SC 631 , 1988 (15 ) ECC457 (SC ), 1988 (34 )ELT8 (SC ), JT1988 (1 )SC 228 , 1988 (1 )SCALE214 , (1988 )1 scc605 , [1988 ]2 SCR732 , [1988 ]69 STC58 (SC ) the interpretation was of the words "domestic electrical appliances". It was observed that it need not actually be used in household but must be of a kind generally used for household purpose. The decision given in Viswa and Co. v. State of Gujarat [1966] 17 STC 581 (Guj) to the following effect was approved : "a domestic electrical appliance, in our opinion, would be an electrical appliance of a kind generally used for domestic purposes. It may also be used at places other than the home or the house, but that would not destroy the character of a domestic electrical appliance which attaches to it by reason of its being a kind of an electrical appliance generally used for the household. There are several electrical appliances which are generally used in the household, such as electric irons, electrical sewing machines and electrical cooking-ranges which are also used in other establishments. But these electrical appliances do not therefore cease to be domestic electrical appliances. It is of course not necessary that an electrical appliance, in order to satisfy the description of a domestic electrical appliance, must be actually used in the home or the house. But these electrical appliances do not therefore cease to be domestic electrical appliances. It is of course not necessary that an electrical appliance, in order to satisfy the description of a domestic electrical appliance, must be actually used in the home or the house. What is necessary is that it must be of a kind which is generally used for household purposes and if that test is applied, there is no doubt that electric fans are domestic electrical appliances and the Tribunal was therefore right in holding that they fall within entry 52 of schedule B. " ( 5 ) FROM entry 29, what is contemplated by the Legislature is that the firewood or charcoal when sold for domestic use is exempt. Since the entry itself has excluded the use in the hotel that alone could be subjected to tax. Use on other basis cannot be made liable to tax. Another incongruity in these proceedings is that the appellate authority has proceeded only on the basis of the sales made to the Central prison whereas the revising authority has considered in respect of supplies made to HAL and MPM. Not a single word has been said by the revising authority in respect of supplies of firewood and charcoal to Central prison. Additional Commissioner while exercising the power of revision has not disturbed the order of the appellate authority in respect of the supplies made to Central prison and therefore there was no necessity of quashing that order. ( 6 ) IN view of the observations made above, we are of the view that the supplies made to Central prison cannot be subjected to tax. ( 7 ) THE assessing authority has very casually without discussing the sales made to other institutions had proceeded to pass the assessment order. The word "hotel" was considered by one of us (Singhal, J. ,) in Bangalore Golf Club v. Assistant Commissioner of Luxury Taxes [1999] 115 STC 338 (Kar) elaborately and considering the observations made therein the canteen cannot be considered as hotel. Since in the entry only supplies to the hotel have been subjected to tax, the order of the revising authority cannot be considered to be in accordance with law. Since in the entry only supplies to the hotel have been subjected to tax, the order of the revising authority cannot be considered to be in accordance with law. ( 8 ) BY providing an exception to hotel in the entry, the legislative intent appears to be that without this exclusion even use by hotel would have been considered as domestic use. But for the exception in the entry, supplies to hotel cannot be treated as for domestic use. Appeals are accordingly allowed.