JUDGMENT V. K. GUPTA, C.J. - The point involved for consideration is very short and simple in this revision filed under section 55 of the Uttaranchal Value Added Tax Act, 2005 ("the 2005 Act", for short). The Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Uttarakhand (Full Bench), vide its judgment dated January 24, 2009 has held that seeds of all kinds, including rejected seeds, are non-taxable. Aggrieved, the Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Uttarakhand has filed the present revision under section 55 of the aforesaid 2005 Act. Before the 2005 Act came into force, Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 ("the 1948 Act", for short) was the law applicable on the subject. Section 3 of the aforesaid 1948 Act was the charging section. Under section 4, exemption from payment of tax was given to various kinds of goods, including such goods as the State Government may by notification in the Gazette exempt. By exercising the power vesting in the State Government under the aforesaid section 4 of the 1948 Act, the Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification on January 31, 1985, whereby, inter alia, at entry 47 of the said Notification, seeds certified by the certification agency under the Seeds Act, 1956 were exempted from payment of tax and the condition imposed was that these seeds must be sold in sealed bags and containers. The Uttaranchal Value Added Tax Act, 2005 repealed the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act. In the 2005 Act, section 3, like in the 1948 Act, was the charging section and similarly section 4 of the 2005 Act, like in the 1948 Act, was also the exemption section. However, unlike section 4 of the 1948 Act, where in clause (c) exemption from payment of tax was to come into being upon the issuance of a notification by the State Government, in clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 4 of the 2005 Act, it has been laid and stipulated that no tax shall be payable on the sale and purchase of the goods specified in Schedule I to the 2005 Act. Entry 52 of Schedule I to the Act reads thus : "Seeds of all kinds other than oil-seeds." Mr. Entry 52 of Schedule I to the Act reads thus : "Seeds of all kinds other than oil-seeds." Mr. Sudhir Kumar, learned brief holder appearing for the petitioner, submits that the expression, "seeds of all kinds", used in entry 52 of Schedule I to the 2005 Act, must be read in the context of and along with sections 6 and 7 of the Seeds Act, 1966 and section 19 thereof. We totally and absolutely disagree with him because the 2005 Act, being a pure fiscal statute and it exempting from the payment of tax seeds of all kinds, we do not have to fall back upon any provision of the Seeds Act, 1966. The Statement of Objects and Reasons as well as the preamble of the Seeds Act, 1966 clearly suggests to us that both the statutes operate in totally independent and different fields and one has no relation, link or inter-dependence with the other. The 2005 Act, being a fiscal statute, operates in a totally different and independent field and exempts levy of tax on seeds of all kinds. The expression, "seeds of all kinds", used in entry 52 of Schedule I to the 2005 Act, clearly, unmistakably and unambiguously takes away from the liability of paying tax "seeds of all kinds". It does not make rejected seeds, inferior seeds or superior seeds, liable to pay tax. The Legislature, by using the expression, "seeds of all kinds", has clearly manifested its intention of including actually each and every kind of seeds, except of course oil-seeds, from the imposition of tax liability. The Tribunal was justified in its view with which we fully concur and find no merit in this petition, which is dismissed, but without any order as to costs.