TMI Blog1977 (7) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Meerut?" The facts of these two cases have been set out in the orders of reference. Suffice it to state, that the assessee is a manufacturer of tin containers in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Notification No. ST-2409/X-902(15)-68 dated 28th May, 1969, issued under the U.P. Sales Tax Act read as follows: "The turnover, with effect from the date of publication of this notification in the Gazette, be exempted from the payment of sales tax in respect of sanitary cans manufactured by M/s. Poysha Industrial Co. Ltd., Ghaziabad, during a period of three years." The above notification was amended by Notification No. ST-6996/X902(15)-68 dated 27th August, 1969, by substituting for the words "sanitary cans", the words "open top sanitary cans and lithographed/ plain general line tin containers." By clause 30(3) of U.P. Ordinance No. 12 of 1975, the above notification was further amended by substituting for the words "the turnover in respect of", the words "the turnover of sales made within the State by the manufacturing dealer in respect of". U.P. Ordinance No. 12 of 1975 was substituted by U.P. Act No. 38 of 1975. Section 31(3) of U.P. Act No. 38 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hould, in our opinion, be regarded as a general exemption of all sales of tin containers by the assessee in Uttar Pradesh and not as exemption under any specified conditions or any specified circumstances. Though U.P. Ordinance No. 12 of 1975 and U.P. Act No. 38 of 1975 substituted the words, "the turnover of sales made within the State by the manufacturing dealer in respect of", for the words "the turnover in respect of", in the notification granting exemption to the assessee, such substitution of the words has not rendered the exemption any the less a general exemption from State sales tax on all sales made by the assessee in the State of Uttar Pradesh. We are unable to agree with the contrary view taken by the Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax. Even so, the learned standing counsel contended that the exemption granted to the assessee under the aforesaid notification in regard to the turnover of sales of tin containers, cannot be regarded as exemption from State sales tax generally on sales or purchases of tin containers. He maintained that the exemption was granted only in respect of sales effected by the assessee in the State of Uttar Pradesh and not on sales of tin containers eff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r-State sale cannot be disputed. Sub-section (2A) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, as it stood in the relevant assessment years, namely, 1969-70 and 1970-71, read as follows: "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or subsection (2), if under the sales tax law of the appropriate State the sale or purchase, as the case may be, of any goods by a dealer is exempt from tax generally or is subject to tax generally at a rate which is lower than two per cent (whether called a tax or fee or by any other name), the tax payable under this Act on his turnover in so far as the turnover or any part thereof relates to the sale of such goods shall be nil or, as the case may be, shall be calculated at the lower rate. Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section, a sale or purchase of goods shall not be deemed to be exempt from tax generally under the sales tax law of the appropriate State if under that law it is exempt only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions or in relation to which the tax is levied at specified stages or otherwise than with reference to the turnover of the goods." It substituted proviso to section 8(1), as it originally ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be an exemption in specified circumstances or under specified conditions. The court repelled the contention by stating that the exemption was to all registered dealers without any restriction or condition." The observation of the Supreme Court, while considering Hindustan Safety Glass Works case(2), was "The stipulation in the notification in Hindustan Safety Glass Works case(1), that the turnover of such sales would for a period of three years be exempt from payment of sales tax did not amount to exempting the turnover of such goods from tax under specified circumstances or specified conditions." We may point out that Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd.(2) was decided both by the Supreme Court and the High Court in the light of section 8(2A), as it stood after the amendment in 1972. The omission of the word "dealer" by the amendment in 1972 is significant. But we are concerned with the unamended definition. The mischief sought to be remedied in 1958 was, as pointed out by us, only this that the mere exemption of goods under the State law did not mean that it was exempt under the Central Act as well. By section 8(2A) it was confined only to those cases where the sales or purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it could be shown that such goods belonged to the class specified in the explanation to section 8(2A) of the Central Act. As the toughened glasses and mirrors manufactured by the company did dot fall in such a category the turnover of sales of those goods in the hands of the company was not liable to tax under the Central Act. The stipulation in the notification in Hindustan Safety Glass Works case(1), that the turnover of such sales would for a period of three years be exempt from payment of sales tax did not amount to exempting the turnover of such goods from tax under specified circumstances or specified conditions." As the view taken by this court in Hindustan Safety Glass Works case[1974] 34 S.T.C. 209; 1974 U.P.T.C. 502. has been noticed by the Supreme Court and was not disapproved by it, the contention of the learned standing counsel that the exemption granted under the aforesaid notification in favour of the assessee-applicant is not a general exemption under the State Sales Tax Act but only an exemption in specified conditions or specified circumstances and that subsection (2A) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act is not attracted, cannot be accepted. Is the tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Fourth Schedule shall be exempt from tax under the Act In respect of such goods. Likewise, section 9 empowers the State Government to notify exemptions and deductions of tax. Thus, the law postulates goods which are exempt from tax or which can be made exempt from tax by a Government notification. Such goods can be broadly categorised as goods which are generally exempt from tax. This is in telling contrast with section 6 and the Third Schedule. This study of contrast reinforces our inference that goods mentioned in the Third Schedule are not generally exempt from tax." The decision in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Arjunmal Yoganath1971 U.P.T.C. 22. is also not helpful. It was also a case where neither the Act nor the notification granted any general exemption. In the light of the foregoing discussion, our answers to the questions referred to us are as follows: (1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the turnover of the assessee was exempt generally from State sales tax in view of Notification No. ST-2409/X-902(15)-68 dated 28th May, 1969, as amended by Notification No. ST-6996/X-902(15)-68 dated 27th August, 1969, and, consequently, its inter-State sales were a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
