JUDGMENT N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J 1. The Accounts Officer (Bills), BSNL, Kannur, who is arrayed as accused in S.T. No.544/2007 of JFCM, Payyannur, is the petitioner. This petition is filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash Annexure A-6 complaint. In Annexure A-6 complaint, the complainant – Kunhimangalam Grama Panchayat has alleged that the accused failed to pay Professional Tax for the year 2006-07. The total amount payable was shown to be Rs.2,500/-. It was mentioned that the Professional Tax was assessed taking into account the total business turnover of the two telephone exchanges situated within the limits of that Grama Panchayat. The petitioner -BSNL contends that BSNL is a company wholly owned by the Government of India and that the main function of BSNL is to provide basic telephones, mobile service connection, internet connections and other allied services. It is further contended that all those services are done through the telephone exchanges and towers constructed by the BSNL. It is not disputed that there are various telephone exchanges throughout the State. 2. According to the petitioner, the BSNL is not doing any business but only renders service to the subscribers and no buying, making, manufacturing, exporting or importing is done by the BSNL in the telephone exchanges within the jurisdiction of the complainant-Panchayat. According to the accused, the BSNL is only collecting service taxes from the subscribers and these service taxes so collected are paid to the Government of India. Hence, according to the petitioner Annexrue A-6 complaint filed against the petitioner for the alleged non payment of professional tax is an abuse of process of court, for, according to the petitioner the BSNL is not liable to pay professional tax. 3. Section 204 of Kerala Pachayat Raj Act, 1994, deals with the collection of professional tax. Hence, according to the petitioner Annexrue A-6 complaint filed against the petitioner for the alleged non payment of professional tax is an abuse of process of court, for, according to the petitioner the BSNL is not liable to pay professional tax. 3. Section 204 of Kerala Pachayat Raj Act, 1994, deals with the collection of professional tax. It reads: "(1) The profession tax shall, subject to such rules as may be prescribed be levied every half year in every Village Panchayat area on :- (i) every company which transacts business in such Panchayat area for not less then sixty days in the aggregate in that half year and (ii) every person who, in that half year- (a) exercise a profession, art or calling, or transacts business or holds any appointment, public or private- (i) within such Panchayat area for not less than sixty days in the aggregate, or (ii) outside such Panchayat area but who resides in it for not less than sixty days in the aggregate, or (b) resides in such Panchayat area for not less than sixty days in the aggregate and is in receipt of any income from investments. (2) The profession tax shall be levied at such rates as may be fixed by the Village Panchayat not exceeding the maximum rates prescribed. (3) A person shall be chargeable under the class appropriate to his aggregate income from all the surces specified in sub-section (1) as being liable to the tax." (underlined by me to lay emphasis) BSNL admittedly is a company. Therefore, the question for consideration is whether the BSNL, which is a company 'transacts business' within the area of the complainant-Panchayat. 4. The expression 'Transacts Business', as defined in Rule 2(c) of Kerala Panchayat Raj (Profession Tax) Rules, 1966 means: "The doing of acts or business of whatever nature whether isolated or not, such as soliciting, obtaining or transmitting orders or buying, making, manufacturing, exporting, importing, receiving, transmitting or otherwise dealing with goods." (underlined by me to lay emphasis) Therefore, the crucial question for consideration is whether the BSNL is engaged in doing of acts or business or is otherwise dealing with goods. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the BSNL is not soliciting, obtaining or transmitting orders etc nor is it otherwise dealing with goods. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the BSNL is not soliciting, obtaining or transmitting orders etc nor is it otherwise dealing with goods. But the learned counsel for the respondent-Panchayat submits that the telephone exchanges under the BSNL are transacting business by selling SIM Cards and also by doing such activities for gain; it is an undertaking in the course of which goods or services are supplied, otherwise than free of charge. 6. Sri. Arun Kumar, the learned counsel for the respondent -Panchayath submits that the publication effected by the BSNL in its website itself would make it clear that the BSNL took over the business of providing telecom services and network services from the erstwhile Central Government Departments of Telecom Services and Telecom Operations with effect from 1.10.2000. Even if it is accepted that the Telecom Department was earlier concerned only with rendering services, time has changed, after the BSNL has taken over business and now the BSNL is selling SIM Cards and is also providing network facilities. They are collecting amounts which would come within the definition/expression-'transacts business', it is argued. 7. Sri. Arun Kumar has also referred to Ramanatha Aiyar's Law Lexicon in support of his submission that the word 'business' is of a large signification, and in its broadest sense includes nearly all the affairs in which either an individual or a Corporation can be actors. Its Statutory definition, "includes a professional practice and includes any other undertaking which is carried on for gain or reward or which is an undertaking in the course of which goods or services are supplied otherwise than free of charge". 8. The BSNL, in its web site, has described its activities as: "BSNL is the only service provider, making focused efforts & planned initiatives to bridge the rural-urban digital divide in ICT sector. In fact, there is no telecom operator in the country to beat its reach with its wide network giving services in every nook & corner of the country & operates across India except New Delhi & Mumbai. Whether it is inaccessible areas of Siachen glacier or North-Eastern regions of the country, BSNL serves its customers with a wide bouguet of telecom services namely Wireline, CDMA mobile, GSM mobile, Internet, Broadband, Carrier Service, MPLS-VPN, VSAT, VoIP, IN Services, FTTH, etc. BSNL is numero uno of India in all services in its license area. Whether it is inaccessible areas of Siachen glacier or North-Eastern regions of the country, BSNL serves its customers with a wide bouguet of telecom services namely Wireline, CDMA mobile, GSM mobile, Internet, Broadband, Carrier Service, MPLS-VPN, VSAT, VoIP, IN Services, FTTH, etc. BSNL is numero uno of India in all services in its license area. The company offers wide ranging & most transparent tariff schemes designed to suit every customer. BSNL has 90.09 million cellular & 5.06 million WLL customers as on 31.07.2011. 3G Facility has been given to all 2G connections of BSNL. In basic services, BSNL is miles ahead of its rivals, with 24.58 million wireline phone subscribers i.e. 71.93% share of the wireline subscriber base." Other activities are also mentioned in their web site. This, according to the learned counsel for the complainant, is an act of soliciting, which also would come within the expression 'Transacts Business', as mentioned in Rule 2(c) of the Rules mentioned earlier. 9. It is further argued that since the BSNL, through its Telephone Exchanges, sells SIM Cards it can be very well found that they are otherwise dealing with goods; which comes within the expression 'Transacts Business'. The learned counsel also refers to the Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, in support of his submission that the word 'business' has to be understood in a wider sense. In Wikipedia 'business' is described as: "A business (also known as enterprise or firm) is an organization engaged in the trade of goods, services, or both to consumers. Businesses are predominant in capitalist economies, where most of them are privately owned and administered to earn profit to increase the wealth of their owners. Businesses may also be not-for-profit or state-owned. A business owned by multiple individuals may be referred to as a company, although that term also has a more precise meaning." The learned counsel has also relied upon the decision in Telecom District Manager v. Labour Court 2004 (2) Short Notes Case No.29, where it was held that the Telecom Department is an 'industry' within the definition of Industrial Disputes Act because it is engaged in a commercial activity and the Department is not engaged in discharging any of the sovereign functions of the State. Sri.C.S.Ramanathan, the learned counsel for the accused submits that the decision(supra) has no application to the facts of this case since, there, the court was mainly dealing with the provisions contained in the Industrial Disputes Act, to hold whether the Telecom Department is an industry coming within the definition of section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 10. The word 'business' has been described as a word of flexibility or much signification and very comprehensive. The word denotes not only all gainful occupations but all occupations or duties in which men are engaged. The words 'otherwise dealing with goods' would include such transaction where hand sets of telephones are supplied to the customers and the BSNL is required to render services as per the terms of the contract entered into between the BSNL and the customer. It is a kind of commercial activity telescoped to professional activity and so it can be understood as 'business' because the ultimate and prime object of such transaction is profit. If engaged in sale of goods; namely SIM Cards and other articles, it has to be understood that it is being done by BSNL for a profit. 11. BSNL v. Union of India 2006 Sales Tax Cases Volume 145 was a case where the principal question to be decided by the apex Court was the nature of transaction by which mobile phone connections were enjoyed to find whether it is a sale or is it a service or is it both? It was held that if it was a sale then the States are legislatively competent to levy sales tax on the transaction under entry 54 List II of the Seventh Sechdule to the Constitution. If it is a service then the Central Government alone can levy service tax under entry 97 of List I. It was held that the imposition of the sales tax on any facility of the telecommunication services is untenable in law. The contention that has been raised is that the telephone service is nothing but a service and that there is no sales element apart from the obvious one relating to the hand set. That and any other accessory supplied by the service provider, according to the apex Court, remains to be taxed under the State Sales Tax Laws. The contention that has been raised is that the telephone service is nothing but a service and that there is no sales element apart from the obvious one relating to the hand set. That and any other accessory supplied by the service provider, according to the apex Court, remains to be taxed under the State Sales Tax Laws. In the case cited supra, it was argued that a SIM Card merely represented a means of access and to identify the subscribers and that was part of the service of a telephone connection. 12. In Escotal (2002) 126 STC 475 (Ker) it was held that the SIM Card comes under the word 'goods' as defined under the State Sales Tax Act. It is not necessary to delve deep into the definition of 'goods' mentioned in the Sales Tax Act. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that it is not a case where the SIM Card is merely incidental to the service provided. The SIM Cards are sold either through their franchisees or from the Telephone Exchange itself. 13. If it is a case where the SIM Cards and other telephone apparatus or goods are sold from the Telephone Exchange itself and if BSNL solicits the citizens to have BSNL connections or is otherwise dealing with goods, then certainly it can be said that the BSNL 'transacts business' within the meaning of Rule 2(c), referred to earlier. Therefore, the prime question would be whether in a particular Telephone Exchange SIM Cards and/or other goods are sold, in which case it can be held that the BSNL transacts business. If so, they would be liable to pay Profession Tax as enjoined under section 204 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. That would actually be a question of fact which has to be decided depending on the materials produced before the Magistrate at the trial. Therefore, whether, in the Telephone Exchanges in Kunhimangalam Grama Panchayat, the SIM Cards or other goods are being sold or dealt with are to be gone into at the time of trial. As such I find no reason to quash the proceedings invoking section 482 of Cr.P.C. 14. In the result, this Criminal M.C. is dismissed. The petitioner/accused can raise all contentions before the trial Court.