TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15, 1980, on which date by an amendment to the Act the rate of tax on those items was increased from 8 per cent to 10 per cent, on the ground that the notification falls under section 8-A(1)(a) of the Act?" 2.. In order to appreciate the above question of law, it is necessary to set out the relevant portion of section 8-A of the Act. It reads: "8-A. Power of State Government to notify exemptions and reductions of tax.-(1) The State Government may, by notification, make an exemption or reduction in rate, in respect of any tax payable under this Act- (a) on the sale or purchase of any specified goods or class of goods, at all points in the series of sales by successive dealers; or (b) by any specified class of persons, in regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f tax in respect of any class of dealers under section 8-A(1)(b) is concerned, it continues to be in force until the same is cancelled or modified by any notification as provided under sub-section (3). As far as these petitions are concerned, the relevant notification is dated April 23, 1975. It reads: "GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Karnataka Government Secretariat, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore, dated 23rd April, 1975. Notification Whereas by Notification No. S.O. 294 (FD 408 CSL 68) dated 22nd January, 1969, the rate of tax payable under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, on the first point of sale in respect of the sales of twist drills, taps, dies, reamers, cutters, endmills and other similar small machine tools was reduced to 3 per cent; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en that the notification did not fall under section 8-A(1)(a) of the Act and, therefore, it cannot be said that the notification stood automatically cancelled with effect from March 15, 1980, by virtue of sub-section (3-A) of section 8-A of the Act. This contention has been rejected by the Tribunal. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has presented these two revision petitions. 5.. Sri S.P. Bhat, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the notification dated April 23, 1975, does not fall under section 8-A(1)(a) of the Act and the notification itself does not say so, and if it is a notification which does not fall under section 8-A(1)(a) of the Act, it follows that the exemption or reduction of tax granted by the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taxed at single point or multi-point. It is also open for the State Government to say as to whether the exemption granted is in respect of a series of transactions by all the successive dealers in respect of goods liable for tax at multi-point or in respect of single point. The entire power under clause (1)(a) of section 8-A relates to grant of exemption in respect of goods as distinct from granting of exemption in respect of specified class of dealers in respect of which the power is conferred under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 8-A of the Act. 6.. Once we understand the meaning of section 8-A of the Act there is absolutely no difficulty in finding out as to whether the notification dated April 23, 1975, falls under section 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
