TMI Blog1971 (9) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal No. 1955 of 1969, Writ Appeal No. 180 of 1967 - - - Dated:- 22-9-1971 - HEGDE K.S. AND GROVER A.N. JJ. Dr. V.A. Seyid Mohammad, Senior Advocate (M.R.K. Pillai, Advocate, with him), for the respondent. S.V. Gupte, Senior Advocate (Sardar Bahadur, Vishnu Bahadur Saharya and Miss Yougindra Khushalani, Advocate, with him), for the appellant. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the court was delivered by HEGDE, J. -The appellant, a limited company, was a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in brief "the Act"). It was a manufacturer as well as a dealer in liquor. It was selling liquor to dealers in Pondicherry, Karakkal and Goa. For the year 1962-63, its t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) of sub-section (1)(b) are goods of the class or classes specified in the certificate of registration of the registered dealer purchasing the goods as being intended for resale by him or subject to any rules made by the Central Government in this behalf, for use by him in the manufacture or processing of goods for sale or in mining or in the generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power." Sub-section (4) provides that the provisions of sub-section (1) relating to lower rate shall not apply unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes a declaration in the prescribed form, that is the 'C' form in the prescribed manner. Sub-section (5) says: "Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the State Government ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rry. Hence it did not comply with the conditions laid down in the notifications. The provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 8 could not be satisfied in the case of sales to dealers in Pondicherry as the Act had not been extended to that territory during that assessment year and in the case of sales to dealers in Goa as the relevant statutory machinery had not been established. Hence the respondent assessed the appellant at 40 per cent. on the turnover relating to sales mentioned earlier. Aggrieved by the assessment orders made against it by the respondent, the appellant moved the High Court of Kerala under article 226 of the Constitution to quash the assessment order. A learned single Judge of the Kerala High Court quashed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13(3) and (4) of the Act. This court held that it was the duty of the dealers to furnish the declarations in form 'C' within reasonable time. In our judgment the High Court rightly held that the said decision has no application to the facts of this case. Therein this court was considering the declaration required to be produced under section 8(4). In that case the impugned rule was found to have gone beyond the provisions in section 8(4). The declarations that the appellant was required to produce were declarations prescribed by the notifications issued under section 8(5). Under that section the State Government was empowered to provide for hard cases which may not come within the scope of section 8(4). The notifications issued afforded ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d because of the fact that the Act was not extended to Pondicherry but such a difficulty confers no rights on the dealers. But then, the State of Kerala tried to get over that difficulty by issuing notifications under section 8(5). The appellant did not take the benefit afforded by those notifications. Hence he has only to blame himself. In the case of the sales to dealers in Goa, no doubt the appellant did produce the declarations in the prescribed form but those declarations were not produced within the time prescribed. The notifications issued prescribed that the declarations in question should be produced within the time prescribed therein. We have already held that those notifications were valid notifications. The appellant has suf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
