TMI Blog1961 (12) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation and that the levy of tax at two per cent. under section 8(2) of the Act is illegal being discriminatory. These contentions failed before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same contentions are now pressed before us. Originally the petitioners appear to have claimed that they were only agents in putting through the sale transactions, and that, therefore, no inter-State sales were involved. This contention was examined and found to be not established and that contention has now been abandoned. We have in T.C. Nos. 171 to 173 of 1960*, separately dealt with the question of the validity of the notification bringing section 6 of the Act into force and similar contentions advanced in these cases have been repelled by us. Followin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enerally and not in specified cases or in specified circumstances..........." To our minds, the correct interpretation of this expression is that the goods should be totally exempt from tax before similar exemption from the levy of Central sales tax can become available; but where the exemption from taxation is conferred on conditions such as that the turnover of a dealer under the local sales tax law is below the minimum prescribed, or that the tax will attach to a transaction only in certain circumstances, there is no exemption from tax "generally". This provision cannot apply to the present case. It is next argued, with particular reference to the part of the turnover made taxable under section 8(2) of the Act, that since the incidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in the rupee, while similar dealers in such articles but not sold in hotels, boarding houses and restaurants were taxed only at three pies; and further, even dealers in such articles sold in hotels, boarding houses and restaurants with a turnover of less than Rs. 25,000 were taxed only at three pies. This court held that the classification was not based upon any reasonable or intelligible criteria having just and reasonable relation to the object of the Act and accordingly held the provision to be void and unenforceable. Dalmia v. Justice Tendolkar(1) has also been cited. We are unable to see how the present Act, in so far as it makes certain transactions liable under section 8(1) and certain others under section 8(2) of the Act, can come ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
