Judgment :- 1. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, hereinafter, referred to as ‘the Act’). It is carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of petroleum products. The petroleum products dealt by the assessee company in the State of Karnataka is either received by way of stock transfer from branches outside the State of Karnataka or by way of purchases effected in the course of inter state trade or from the registered dealers inside the State. The assessee filed annual returns for the year ending 31.03.2002. It also filed revised returns. In response to a call notice issued calling upon the assessee to produce all its books of accounts and documents for verification, they were produced. On verification of the said books of accounts, it was noticed that the assessee had claimed exemption on a turnover of High Speed Diesel (HSD) of Rs.26,34,19,619/-in terms of Notification No.FD 65 CSL 2001, dated 04.04.2001/10.07.2001 issued under Section 8-A of the KST Act 1957 with regard to sale of High Speed Diesel (HSD) to fishermen. According to the said Notification, the assessee was eligible for benefit of tax exemption in terms of the above Notification. However, the benefit was restricted to the tax payable under Section 5 only and not Section 6-D of the Act. In terms of the aforesaid Notification, according to the Department, benefit was available only on sales effected under Section 5 of the Act and the said Notification did not exempt the payment of levy of cess. The levy of cess at the rate of 5% of the amount of tax did not qualify for exemption in terms of the said Notification. Therefore, the assessment order came to be passed and the assessing officer levied cess under Section 6-D of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Joint Commissioner of Commercial taxes who affirmed the said order. In the appeal against the said orders before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, the tribunal held, that the Notification extending any concession was required to be given effect to as per the strict terminology of the concerned Notification. Since the Notification involved exclusively exempted levy of tax under Section 5 on the sales of HSD sold to fishermen for use in fishing activities, no further exemption from other levies under the Act could be extended. Since the Notification involved exclusively exempted levy of tax under Section 5 on the sales of HSD sold to fishermen for use in fishing activities, no further exemption from other levies under the Act could be extended. Such being the case, the levy of cess at 10 paise per litre of HSD to the extent of 16,612 kilo litres sold within this State to fishermen for use in fishing activities was sustainable and therefore, the tribunal dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by these orders, the assessee is before this Court in revision. 2. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted, though cess is independent of tax payable, the cess is payable only if tax is payable under the Act. It is clear from the words used under Section 6-D. Wherein it is stated that, in addition to the tax payable under Section 5, 5-B, 5-C and 6, there shall be levied and collected by way of cess and therefore, if by virtue of the Notification, exemption is granted for payment of sales tax under Section 5 of the Act, it necessarily follows that the cess payable under Section 6-D on such sales also stands exempted and thee was no necessity to issue a Notification issued that the cess is also exempted. However, the authorities have not properly appreciated this legal aspect and has given an incorrect interpretation to the Notification holding that, when in the Notification, express words are not used granting exemption to the cess payable under Section 6-D, cess is not exempted. 3. Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that, the Notification issued clearly sets out the exemption, which should be strictly construed. The Courts by way of process of an interpretation cannot add words, which are not used by the Government in extending the benefit of exemption. In support of his contention, he also relied on judgment of the Apex Court as well as the Division Bench of this Court, wherein it has been held, that the Notification granting exemptions cannot be interpreted in a broad sense, on the contrary, it has to be given effect to by a strict interpretation and therefore, he submits the order passed by the authorities below is strictly in accordance with law and do not call fro any interference in this revision. 4. 4. Therefore, the short question that arises for out consideration is : “Whether the notification No.F.D.65 CSL 2001 dated 10.7.2001, exempt the payment of cess under Section 6-D of the Act? 5. Section 8-A of the Act empowers the State Government to notify exemptions and reductions of tax. In pursuance of the power conferred on the State, notification No.FD 65 CSL 2001, Bangalore, dated 10.7.2001 was issued which was duly published in the Karnataka Gazette, Extra-ordinary No.1340 dated 10.7.2001 and the same is extracted hereunder: “In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (Karnataka Act 25 of 1957) and in suppression of the “Notification No.FD 65 CSL 2001 dated 4th April, 2001 [See Sl.No.845A], the Government of Karnataka hereby exempts with immediate effect, the tax payable under Section 5 of the Act, on the sale of diesel not exceeding fifty thousand kilo litres for supply to fishermen for use in fishing activities as per the indents issued on a monthly basis by the Director of Fisheries, Government of Karnataka as under: Sl. No Period Quantity of Diesel To be released for the month 1 2 3 1 01-04-2001 to 30-04-2001 5,250 Kilo litres 2 01-05-2001 to 31-05-2001 5,250 Kilo litres 3 01-06-2001 to 10-06-2001 1,750 Kilo litres 4 15-08-2001 to 31-08-2001 2,750 Kilo litres 5 01-09-2001 to 30-09-2001 5,000 Kilo litres 6 01-10-2001 to 31-10-2001 5,000 Kilo litres 7 01-11-2001 to 30-11-2001 5,000 Kilo litres 8 01-12-2001 to 31-12-2001 5,000 Kilo litres 9 01-01-2002 to 31-01-2002 5,000 Kilo litres 10 01-02-2002 to 28-02-2002 5,000 Kilo litres 11 01-03-2002 to 31-03-2002 5,000 Kilo litres 6. A perusal of the notification makes it clear that the Government of Karnataka has exempted the tax payable under Section 5 of the Act on the sale of diesel not exceeding 50,000 K.L. for supply to fishermen for use in fishing activities as per the indent issued on a monthly basis by the Director of Fisheries, Government of Karnataka. Therefore, it is clear that the Government of Karnataka wanted to extend the benefit of tax exemption to Small Scale Fishermen who are living below the poverty line, to enable them to eke out a decent livelihood. Section 5 of the Act is the charging section which levies tax on sale or purchase of goods. Therefore, it is clear that the Government of Karnataka wanted to extend the benefit of tax exemption to Small Scale Fishermen who are living below the poverty line, to enable them to eke out a decent livelihood. Section 5 of the Act is the charging section which levies tax on sale or purchase of goods. Section 6-D provides for levy of cess, which reads as under: “6-D, Levy of cess, (1) In addition to the tax payable under Sections 5, 5-B, 5-C and 6, there shall be levied and collected by way of cess (for a period of four years) with effect from the First day of April, 1998 for the purpose equity investment in [infrastructure Development Corporation (Karnataka) Limited and Bangalore Mas Rapid Transit Limited in the proposition of 67.33 respectively / a tax, on sale or purchase effected [xxxx] by any dealer], at the rate of five per cent of tax payable under the said sections: Provided that where a dealer is selling to any person goods specified in Serial Number 12 of Part ‘M’ of the Second Schedule [xxxx], such dealer shall pay the case on the sale of – (i) petrol at the rate of twenty-five paise per litre, and (ii) diesel at the rate of ten paise per litre. (2) Nothing contained in the Section shall apply to the goods specified in the Fourth Schedule. (3) The provision of this Act and the rules made there under including those relating to refund or exemption from tax shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the levy, assessment and collection of the cess payable under sub-section (1) as they apply in relation to the levy, assessment and collection of sales tax or purchase tax under this Act.” 7. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Shinde Brothers etc., Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Raichur and Others reported in AIR 1967 S.C.1512, explained the meaning of the word “cess” at Para 39 as under:- “39,….The word ‘cess’ is used in Ireland and is still in use in India although the word rate has replaced it in England. It means a tax and is generally used when the levy is for some special administrative expense which the name (health cess, education cess, road cess, etc.,) indicates. It means a tax and is generally used when the levy is for some special administrative expense which the name (health cess, education cess, road cess, etc.,) indicates. When levied as on increment to an existing tax the name matters not for the validity of the cess must be judged of in the same way as the validity..” 8. A Tax is a compulsory exaction of money by public authority for public purposes enforceable by law and is not payment for services rendered. There is no element of ‘quid pro quo’ between the tax payer and the public authority. A fee is generally defined to be a charge for a special service rendered to individuals by some Government agency. The distinction between a tax and a fee lies primarily in the fact that a tax is levied as a part of a common burden while a fee is a payment for a special benefit or privilege. There is no generic difference between a tax and a fee and both are different forms in which the taxing power of a State manifests itself. The taxes collected are all merged in the general revenue of the State to be applied for general public purposes. A cess may be a tax or a fee. Whether or not a particular cess levied by a statute amounts to a fee or tax would always be a question of fact to be determined in the circumstances of each case. If specific services are rendered to a specific area or to a specific class of persons or trade or business in any local area, and as a condition precedent for the said services or in return for them cess is levied against the said area or the said class of persons or trade or business, the cess is distinguishable from a tax & is described as a fee. It is necessary to enquire what is the primary object of the levy and the essential purpose which it is intended to achieve. Its primary object and the essential purpose must be distinguished from its ultimate or incidental result or consequences. That is the true test in determining the character of the levy. If the specific services is indistinguishable from public service, and in essence is directly a part of it, it would partake the character of tax. Then the word “cess” means a tax, an additional tax. That is the true test in determining the character of the levy. If the specific services is indistinguishable from public service, and in essence is directly a part of it, it would partake the character of tax. Then the word “cess” means a tax, an additional tax. It is levied in addition to an existing tax. It is levied as an increment to an existing tax. Without there being a basic tax, levy of cess would not arise. Normally cess is levied for some special administrative expense which the name indicates, may be for a temporary duration. 9. A reading of the notification makes it clear the legislature wanted to levy cess for a period of 4 years from 1.4.1998 for the purpose of equity investment in Infrastructure Development Corporation (Karnataka) Limited and Bangalore Mass Rapid Transit Limited. Most of the fishermen who are granted the benefit under the notification are residing in coastal areas adjoining Arabian Sea. Specifically they are not the beneficiaries of Bangalore Mas Rapid Transit System to be improved by the State. Even Infrastructure Development Corporation (Karnataka) Limited activities extend to whole of Karnataka. Therefore, it is not a case of any specific service rendered to a specific area or to a specific class of persons or trade or business in any local area and as a condition precedent for the said services or in return for, cess is levied against this class of persons. Therefore, it is in the nature of a tax and not a fee. 10. In this background, when we look at the section, the opening words of Section 6-D makes it clear that Cess is payable in addition to the tax payable under Section-5, 5-B, 5-C and 6. Therefore, it is in the nature of an additional tax or an increment to an existing tax. The rate of cess payable is 5% of the tax payable under Sections 5, 5-B, 5C and 6. However, the proviso prescribes the rate of tax payable in respect of petrol and diesel at the rate of 25 paise per litre and 10 paise per litre respectively. 11. The rate of cess payable is 5% of the tax payable under Sections 5, 5-B, 5C and 6. However, the proviso prescribes the rate of tax payable in respect of petrol and diesel at the rate of 25 paise per litre and 10 paise per litre respectively. 11. No doubt a Division Bench of this court in the case of Commercial Tax Officer, IV Circle, Davanagere, Chitradurga District V/S. Hallur Halappa And Company, Davanagere, Chitradurga District, (196(41) KLJ 503 (HC)(DB), has held that “exemption notification is a departure from regular rule and a person claiming benefit under such notification must establish that claim falls within the four corners of the notification. It is not permissible for the court to read the notification in a manner which would require addition of certain words.” “The court must read the exemption notification as it stands and it is not open for the court to read the same in a manner to determine whether the assessee gets the benefit or not. The mere fact that the respondent may not get benefit, is not sufficient to introduce additional word in the notification to make exemption available for purchase turnover.” 12. The said observations were made in the context of the notification which granted exemption from payment of sales tax. The question was whether it applied to exemption from payment of purchase tax which is covered under an independent section. Purchase tax is not dependent on sales tax. Both are independent taxes payable on different points. When the notification did not mention about the purchase tax as specifically provided under Section 6 and when the learned single judge of this court read into the notification, the exemption of purchase tax also to be under Section 6 of the Act, the Division Bench set aside the same and made the aforesaid observations. 13. When we read Section 6-D, it makes clear that the cess payable under the provisions would be in addition to the tax payable under Sections 5, 5B, 5C and 6. In other words, cess is payable only if the tax is payable under Sections 5, 5B, 5C and 6. If no tax is payable under these charging sections, then the liability to pay levy of cess is not there under the Act. In other words, cess is payable only if the tax is payable under Sections 5, 5B, 5C and 6. If no tax is payable under these charging sections, then the liability to pay levy of cess is not there under the Act. It is settled law that when words are expressly used in a particular provision of law while interpreting those provisions, courts must give effect to each and every word used in the said provision. When the Government in order to mitigate the financial distress on the part of the poor fishermen thought it fit to exempt them from payment of tax under Section 5 of the Ac t, which is the basic tax payable for purchase of petrol or diesel, as the cess was payable in addition to the said tax, which was in the nature of an increment on the tax, the said levy of cess also stands exempted. Any other interpretation to the said provision would not only cause inconvenience to the poor fishermen but would run counter to the State Government’s intention to extend the benefit to the poor fishermen. It is a social as well as a welfare measure, to ameliorate the condition of poor fishermen in the State. The benefit is extended to a class of people who are marginalized because of their financial weakness, with the intention of bringing them to the main stream of the society. Though while interpreting fiscal legislation and the notification issued under such legislation, exemption notification has to be strictly construed and the assessee should bring himself squarely within ambit of the notification, the Courts cannot loose sight of the intention of the Government in issuing such notification. It is not a case of liberal construction of such notification but purposive construction of such notification when a benefit is conferred keeping in mind the historical background with a social objective, effect must be given to such notification to achieve such object. The Courts cannot place such construction on such notification to negate the benefits flowing therefrom on the premise of strict construction. When an attempt is made to deprive the legitimate benefits due to persons who belong to weaker section of the society, a greater responsibility is cast on the Courts to see that this section of the society gets their due by the process of purposive interpretation of such notification. When an attempt is made to deprive the legitimate benefits due to persons who belong to weaker section of the society, a greater responsibility is cast on the Courts to see that this section of the society gets their due by the process of purposive interpretation of such notification. The assessee is a Public Sector undertaking. It is an instrumentality of the State. The cess and tax imposed is an indirect tax. Ultimately, it is the purchaser of petroleum products who has to pay the said cess. The benefit granted in one hand cannot be taken away by the other hand by the State. The payment of cess is not independent of the tax payable under Sections 5, 5B, 5C and 6 and the cess is made payable and is dependent on tax payable under the above said provisions. When the Government grants exemption of payment of tax by way of notification, it follows that the cess payable on the said tax is also exempted from payment. For that purpose, there was no necessity for the Government to issue a notification expressly stating that the cess payable under Section 6-D is also exempted. 14. The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the State in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd., V/s. Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur, Rajasthan has no application to the facts of the case as the question which arose for consideration in the said case was as to whether the blended yarn in which polypropylene predominates and falling under tariff item 18E was not entitled for the benefit under the notification. In that context, the Apex Court held that it is for the assessee to establish that the goods manufactured by him come within the ambit of a Central excise exemption notification. Since it is a case of exemption from duty, there is no question of liberal construction to extend the term and the scope fo the exemption notification Such exemption notification must be strictly construed and the assessee should bring himself squarely within the ambit of the notification. No extended meaning can be given to the exempted item to enlarge the scope of exemption granted by the notification. 15. There cannot be any quarrel with the aforesaid legal proposition. Exemption notification has to be construed strictly. No extended meaning can be given to the exempted item to enlarge the scope of exemption granted by the notification. 15. There cannot be any quarrel with the aforesaid legal proposition. Exemption notification has to be construed strictly. It cannot be construed liberally so as to include items in respect of which exemption was granted by the Government. However, if exemption is granted under a notification from payment of tax and if cess payable is dependent on payment of tax and when the basic liability is exempted incremental liability by way of cess cannot be levied. 16. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that insofar as petroleum products i.e., petrol and diesel are concerned, it is the proviso which applies. It is not dependent on the tax payable under the main section, as under the main section, only a provision is made for levy of tax and it is mentioned that cess payable is 5% of the tax payable. So far as the proviso is concerned, it deals only with the petrol and diesel. The tax is payable not on the basis of the rate of tax payable under Sections 5, 5B, 5C and 6, but on the basis of litres. But section 6D(1) is the section which levies cess and as already stated, the opening words of section makes it clear that the cess is payable in addition to the tax payable. If the tax is not payable, cess is also not payable. 17. In that view of the matter, we are satisfied from the material on record that the observation of the authorities are not proper. They have overlooked the express words contained in Section 6-D, in particular, opening words and also the concept of word “cess”. Cess is payable and is dependent on payment of tax. If tax is exempted, cess automatically stands exempted. Therefore, the impugned orders cannot be sustained. Hence, we pass the following: ORDER The revision petition is allowed and the impugned orders are hereby set aside and the assessee is entitled for exemption from payment of cess under Section 6-D of the Act. Ordered accordingly. Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks from today.