PRAKASH KRISHNA, J. The above revision has been filed under Section 11 (1) of U. P. Trade Tax Act and is directed against the order dated 25. 2. 2000 whereby and whereunder the Trade Tax Tribunal Bench-III, Agra has allowed the second appeal No. 206 of 1999 relating to the assessment year 1994-95 (U. P.) filed by the dealer opposite party and has held that the charges for maintenance and repairs of gas cylinders termed as "service charge" for filling of Oxygen gas is not part of turnover of sale within the meaning of U. P. Trade Tax Act. 2. Challenging the legality and validity of the aforesaid order, the Commissioner of Trade Tax, U. P. has preferred the above revision. In the memo of revision although number of questions of law have been framed, however, Sri B. K. Pandey, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the following question alone will suffice the disposal of the entire controversy: (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to hold that the charges for maintenance of cylinder for filling of Oxygen gas is not a part of turnover of sale despite the maintenance was pre-delivery work and the charges were pre-delivery expenses. " 3. The facts of the case are not much in dispute and may be noted in brief: The dealer opposite party, a limited Company, carries on the business of manufacture and sale of Oxygen gas. For the relevant assessment year i. e. 1994-95 it declared sale of Oxygen gas at Rs. 36, 65, 502. 53 and service charges amounting to Rs. 24, 80, 021. 84 in the sale turnover by the dealer. The claim of the Company that the service charges amounting to Rs. 24, 80, 021. 84 does not form part of taxable turnover was rejected by the Assessing Officer while framing the assessment order. The said order was confirmed in Appeal No. 936 of 1998 by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) IV, Trade Tax, Agra. Second Appeal No. 206 of 1999 was preferred by the dealer opposite party before the Tribunal which came up for consideration before a Bench consisting of two Honble Members. The said order was confirmed in Appeal No. 936 of 1998 by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) IV, Trade Tax, Agra. Second Appeal No. 206 of 1999 was preferred by the dealer opposite party before the Tribunal which came up for consideration before a Bench consisting of two Honble Members. There being difference of opinion in between the two Members, the matter was referred for opinion to a third Member who concurred with the opinion of the learned Member holding that the service charges realised from the customers for maintenance and repairs of cylinders will not form part of turnover The sole basis of majority opinion is that the cylinders in which gas is filled are not goods because they have not been sold to the customers, therefore, anything done to the cylinders to make them worthy for filling the gas, and charged as service charges will not fall within the ambit of Section 2 (i) of the Act. 4. It is admitted case of the parties that the dealer opposite party supplied the manufactured Oxygen gas to the customers as per their orders by filling the gas in the empty cylinders of various sizes supplied by the customers. The case of the dealer opposite party is that under the relevant statutory provisions known as gas Cylinder Rules, 1981, a manufacturer of Oxygen gas is under legal obligation to clean and test the cylinders before filling it with Oxygen. Valves etc. are required to be cleaned and tested before filling the gas in such cylinders. It is not in dispute that the dealer opposite party has charged certain amount from its customers known as service charges towards the expenses incurred by it in carrying out cleaning etc. of the cylinders before filling the gas therein. It is also not in dispute that the cylinders were supplied by the customers and the dealer opposite party has not charged any amount from the customers towards the supply of the cylinders, as sale consideration. After cleaning and testing the cylinders, the gas was filled in them and cost of Oxygen gas was charged. Also service charges for the cleaning and testing of valves etc. of the cylinders, was charged. 5. According to majority opinion of the Tribunal, the service charges thus realised by the dealer opposite party from the customers towards the cleaning etc. After cleaning and testing the cylinders, the gas was filled in them and cost of Oxygen gas was charged. Also service charges for the cleaning and testing of valves etc. of the cylinders, was charged. 5. According to majority opinion of the Tribunal, the service charges thus realised by the dealer opposite party from the customers towards the cleaning etc. of the cylinders shall not form part of turnover on the short ground that such charges were not in respect of the goods in question namely the gas but were in respect of the cylinders which were not goods as they were not subject-matter of transaction of sale. The Tribunal has proceeded to answer the controversy taking into consideration the definition of goods as defined in Section 2 (b), purchase price as defined in Section 2 (gg), sale as defined in Section 2 (h) and the turnover as defined in Section 2 (i) of U. P. Trade Tax Act. 6. Sri B. K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the department submits that the definition of turnover as given in Section 2 (i) is very widely worded. In the definition of turnover aggregate amount for which goods are supplied or distributed by way of sale directly or through another person have been included. He submits that unless excluded by any other provision of the Act, any sum charged by the dealer or any act done by it before or at the time of sale shall be included in the turnover. Reliance was placed upon a Division Bench decision of Kerala High Court in South India Carbonic Gas Industries Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (2004) 135 STC 541. 7. In support of the order of the Tribunal, Sri Bharatji Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the dealer opposite party, on the other hand, submits that what has been sold in the present case is gas in the cylinders supplied by its customers. The activity which has been carried out by the dealer opposite party was with respect to the cylinders supplied by its customers and no element of sale of cylinders in the transaction in question is involved. Elaborating the argument he submits that since the service charges realised were in respect of the cylinders supplied by the customers, it shall not form part of turnover as defined in Section 2 (i) of the Act. Elaborating the argument he submits that since the service charges realised were in respect of the cylinders supplied by the customers, it shall not form part of turnover as defined in Section 2 (i) of the Act. Reliance was placed by him on the following two cases : (1) State oforissa v. B. D. Patnaik, (1989) 75 STC 374 (DB ). (2) M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , Idgah, Agra v. Commissioner of Trade Tax, 1999 (1 )UPTC 259. 8. Considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. Facts of the case are not much in dispute. The dealer opposite party is engaged in the business of supply of Oxygen gas in the cylinders and the cylinders were supplied to the dealer by its customers. Under the provisions of Gas Cylinder Rules, 1981, the dealer opposite party was obliged to clean and test the cylinders before filling it with Oxygen gas. The question which boils down is whether the cleaning and testing charges etc. of the cylinders before filling Oxygen gas therein and charged by the dealer opposite party under the name and style of service charges will form part of turnover1 or not. To answer the said controversy, it is desirable to have a look to the definition of turnover as defined under the Act. Relevant portion of the defintion of turnover as given in Section 2 (i) of the Act is reproduced below: " (i) turnover means the aggregate amount for which goods are supplied or distributed by way of sale or are sold by a dealer, either, directly or through another, on his account or on account of others, whether for cash or deferred payment or other valuable consideration; Explanation I.- (omitted) Explanation II.- Subject to such condition and restrictions, if any, as may be prescribed in this behalf - (i) the amount for which goods are sold shall include any sums charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods sold at the time of or before the delivery thereof, other than cost of freight or delivery, or cost of installation or the amount realised as sales or purchase tax, when such cost or amount is separately charged; (ii ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (iii) where for accommodating a particular customer, a dealer obtains goods from another dealer and immediately disposes of the same without profit to the customer, the sale in respect of such goods shall be included in the turnover of the latter dealer alone; (iv ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 10. The definition of turnover can be divided in following parts: (i) The amount for which goods are sold; (ii) Any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods sold at the time of or before the delivery thereof; (iii) Other than cost of freight or delivery, or cost of installation or the amount realised as sales or purchase tax, when such cost or amount is separately charged. 11. So far as the words amount for which the goods are sold are concerned, they pose no difficulty as they represent the sale consideration. The words any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods sold1 are the keywords. The use of word any in any sum charged for anything done is indicative of the Legislative intent that these words have been used with a view to give a wide connotation to the definition of turnover as defined in Section 2 (i) of the Act. The above view is further fortified from the fact that in the definition of turnover provided in Section 2 (i) of the Act, the words used are aggregate amount which represent the turnover. 12. The word any has been subject-matter of interpretation, time and again. In Union of India v. Shri A. B. Shah and others, JT 1996 (5) SC 128, it has been held that word any has a diversity of meaning and in Blacks law Dictionary it has been stated that this word may be employed to indicate "all" or "every" and its meaning will depend upon the context and subject-matter of the statute. It has been laid down therein as follows : ". . . . . . It has been laid down therein as follows : ". . . . . . It may be pointed out that the word "any" has a diversity of meaning and in Blacks law Dictionary it has been stated that this word may be employed to indicate "all" or "every", and its meaning will depend "upon the context and subject-matter of the statute". A reference to what has been stated in Strouds Judicial Dictionary Vol. I, is revealing inasmuch as the import of the word "any" has been explained from pages 145 to153 of the 4th Edition, a perusal of which shows it has different connotations depending primarily on the subject-matter of the statute and the context of its use. A Bench of this Court in Lucknow Development Authority v. M. K. Gupta, JT 1993 (6) SC 307 : 1994 (1) SCC 243 , gave a very wide meaning to this word finding place in the Section 2 (o) of the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 defining "service". (See para 4 ). (Emphasis supplied) 13. In Corpus Juris Secundum Volume 3-A, besides other meanings of word any, it has been stated on page 899 : "the word "any" is not an unyielding term; it is a word of flexible meaning, and is a general word with a diversity of meanings. Like other general words, its meaning is largely controlled by the context or the subject-matter, for it may have one of several meanings, according to the subject which it qualifies. Furthermore, the word may have different meanings depending on whether it is used in a affirmative or a negative sentence. " 14. In Chief Inspector of Mines v. Karan Singh Thapar, (1962) 1 SCR 9 , the Apex Court has held that any means all. 15. In a cognate statute namely Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, the Supreme Court has interpreted the phrase any sums charged by the dealer with reference to definition of turnover1 therein in M/s. Mcdowell & Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, VII Circle, Hyderabad, AIR 1977 SC 1459 , and has held that any sums charged by the dealer occurring in definition of turnover in Section 2 (s) has to be understood in its ordinary popular sense. So construing the phrase, it means "what is demanded, collected or received by the dealer". 16. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, VII Circle, Hyderabad, AIR 1977 SC 1459 , and has held that any sums charged by the dealer occurring in definition of turnover in Section 2 (s) has to be understood in its ordinary popular sense. So construing the phrase, it means "what is demanded, collected or received by the dealer". 16. In this case, question was whether the excise duty paid by the customer directly, to the excise authority with respect to Indian liquor will form part of consideration of sale of the said liquor or not. Answering the controversy, it was held that since no part of excise duty was collected by the dealer, the payment of excise duty to the excise authority will not form part of turnover. In this connection it was held that under the definition of turnover, the aggregate amount for which the goods are bought or sold is taxable. This aggregate amount includes the tax as part of the price paid by the buyer. The amount goes into the common till of the dealer till he pays the tax. It is money which he keeps using for his business till he pays it over to Government. It has relied upon its earlier judgment given in M/s. George Oakes (P) Ltd. v. State of Madras, AIR 1962 SC 1037 . 17. At this stage, Sri Bharatji Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for the dealer opposite party supports the view of the Tribunal by advancing his argument that the service charges realised by the dealer were not in respect of the goods namely oxygen gas but were in respect of cylinders. Elaborating the argument, it was submitted that in clause (i) of Explanation II, only sum charged for anything done by a dealer in respect of the goods sold shall be included in the defintion of turnover. Empahsis was laid by him that the sum so charged was in respect of the cylinders and not in respect of oxygen gas, the goods sold, therefore, the said sum charged shall not form part of turnover. In other words, the submission is that in respect of the goods should be interpreted in a strict sense to include only those activities carried on by the dealer with the goods sold. However, it is difficult to accept the said line of reasoning. In other words, the submission is that in respect of the goods should be interpreted in a strict sense to include only those activities carried on by the dealer with the goods sold. However, it is difficult to accept the said line of reasoning. The statutory set up of the section shows that the phrase in respect of has been used in their widest meaning. The use of words aggregate amount, any sum charged and for anything done are indicative of the fact that the words in respect of the goods have been used in wider sense, more particularly on the facts of the present case inasmuch as gas can only be sold in a vessel or cylinder. In my considered opinion, the words in respect of the goods mean that things done by a dealer should have some nexus with the goods sold. If that is so, obviously, anything done to the cylinders to make the gas in a deliverable condition will form part of turnover. By filling it in a cylinder it will amount the things done by a dealer in respect of the goods i. e. Oxygen gas, in the present case. 18. In Totaram v. State of Bombay, AIR 1954 SC 496 , it has been held that the words in respect of have been used in a wider sense meaning relating to or with reference to. Similarly, in Har Prasad v. Hans Ram, AIR 1966 All 124 , this Court has interpreted the words in respect of in their widest connotation including even a document which was prepared before the proceedings started in a Court of law but was produced or given in evidence in that proceeding. So is the case in Godavarimisrav. Nanakishore, AIR 1953 Ori 111 (DB ). 19. Similarly, a wider meaning was given in S. S. Light Railway Company Ltd. v. Upper Doabs Sugar Mills, AIR 1960 SC 695 , wherein it was held that the words in respect of used in Section 3 (14) of Railways Act mean for provision of and not for user of. 20. Keeping the meaning of words in respect of, as indicated above, in the background of mind, in my considered opinion, in the present context in respect of goods have been used in the sense that anything done by the dealer should have nexus with the goods. 20. Keeping the meaning of words in respect of, as indicated above, in the background of mind, in my considered opinion, in the present context in respect of goods have been used in the sense that anything done by the dealer should have nexus with the goods. In other words, it should be related to goods and not necessarily in or on the goods itself. 21. The above conclusion is further fortified from the fact that in the definition of turnover the words any sum charged for anything done by the dealer have also been used. It has been already pointed out above that the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Mcdowell & Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, VII Circle, Hyderabad (supra) has held that these words in their popular sense mean what is demanded, collected or received by a dealer (Emphasis supplied ). This being so, the service charges were demanded, collected and received by the dealer and, therefore, it shall be included within the definition of turnover. 22. Kerala High Court in South India Carbonic Gas Industries Ltd. (supra) has also held with reference to the provisions of Kerala General Sales Tax Act wherein definition of turnover is similarly worded, that the dealer who has cleaned and tested the cylinders before filling them with Carbon Dioxide gas and sold Carbon Dioxide gas in cylinders and has raised invoice wherein the dealer charges the expenses incurred for cleaning and testing the cylinders separately is liable to pay sales tax on such charges as such charges shall be included within the definition of turnover. 23. A feeble attempt was made by the learned Senior Counsel to distinguish the said decision on facts on the ground that the charges for cleaning etc. were charged in the same bill while in the case on hand, separate bills were issued. Firstly, there is no such material in support of the aforesaid argument. Even if the service charges were raised by a separate voucher, it will not make any difference so far as the legal position is concerned. Liability to pay tax cannot be avoided by maintaining the account books in a different fashion. The tax liability is not dependent upon the manner of making the entry in the account books. It might have been done by the dealer to avoid the tax liability. 24. Liability to pay tax cannot be avoided by maintaining the account books in a different fashion. The tax liability is not dependent upon the manner of making the entry in the account books. It might have been done by the dealer to avoid the tax liability. 24. So far as the decision in State of Orissa v. B. D. Patnaik (supra) relied by the learned Senior Counsel for the dealer is concerned, it is distinguishable on facts of the case. In that decision it was found that stacking charges will not form part of the turnover as it was found as a fact that stacking charges were incurred after the sale of stones for handling the goods for the convenience and on the instructions of the purchaser. This expenditure was not incurred by the dealer on account of any service either rendered at the time of or before the delivery of goods, which is not the case here. 25. The other decision namely M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , Idgah, Agra v. Commissioner of Trade Tax (supra) has no application to the controversy involved presently. No such ratio, as has been advanced in the case of the dealer opposite party, has been laid down therein. The observations, as contained in paragraph-5 of the judgment, were made in a different context and should be read in the light of the controversy involved therein. 26. In view of the above discussions, this Court is of the view that the Trade Tax Tribunal was not legally justified to hold that the charges for maintenance of cylinders for filling Oxygen gas is not a part of turnover of sale. The said charges were incurred by the dealer for cleaning etc. of cylinders at a pre- delivery stage and will consequently form part of turnover as it has nexus with the goods sold i. e. oxygen gas. The question posed by the department is, therefore, decided in its favour and it is held that the view taken by the Tribunal is not legally sustainable. 27. The revision, therefore, succeeds and is allowed and the order of the Tribunal is hereby set aside with costs of Rs. 2. 000/ -. .