TMI Blog1965 (4) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d: (1) While not extending the Central Sales Tax Act No. 74 of 1956 to the State of Jammu and Kashmir or in other words not enacting that Act for the State of Jammu and Kashmir, did the Parliament by that Act formulate even its first principle of determining, when a sale or purchase of goods takes place in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, qua transaction of sale between dealers of other States of rest of India with those of the State of Jammu and Kashmir? (2) Whether by laying down in section 1(2), it extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir, is it not meant that none of the principles formulated by this Act and the provisions of the sections apply to inter-State transactions by dealers of other St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort question which is canvassed before us, therefore, is whether under the Central Sales Tax Act it is permissible to impose sales tax on a transaction of sale or purchase which takes place in Amritsar but occasions the movement of the goods from the Punjab State to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. For the purpose of understanding the argument and giving our answer to the questions referred, it is not necessary to give any further details about the gross turnover or the date of assessment or any other details. Suffice it to say that sales were made by dealers at Amritsar prior to the amendment in the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter called the Central Act) effected by Act 5 of 1958, whereby the words "except the State of Jammu and Kashmir" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jab. Up to this point, the position is intelligible, but beyond it there seems to me to be a non-sequitur and it does not follow that the State of Jammu and Kashmir must, therefore, be held not to be intended to be included in the State covered by the rule of inter-State sale. I for my part do not find it possible to peer through the mirk to find my way to the conclusion the petitioner desires me to reach. The other submission put forth by the petitioner's learned counsel is that the movement of the goods sold or purchased must be occasioned to terminate in a State to which also the Central Act applies. I again fail to understand how this conclusion is justified. The word "State" is not defined in the Central Act. In the Constitution, Jam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t tax on sales taking place in the State of Punjab which occasion the movement of the goods sold to Jammu and Kashmir State is discriminatory. I am equally unable to appreciate this argument. Indeed, to sustain this submission would, in my view, give rise to discrimination rather than avoid it, for to uphold this submission would mean that dealers in Jammu and Kashmir State, who may as dealers in Amritsar purchase goods in the course of inter-State trade so as to terminate the movement of the goods in Jammu and Kashmir State would not be liable to be taxed, whereas goods as so purchased for being moved into all other States of India would be liable to tax. It is unnecessary to point out that the grievance of the petitioner's learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... little analogy to penal statutes because the burden of paying taxes in a welfare democratic Republic is distributed as equally as possible upon everyone, thus taking the form of a privilege or a contribution towards sustenance of the social order instead of punishment. Of course, the principles embodying criminal penalties etc. in taxing statutes may involve a construction normally applicable to penal laws, but we are not here concerned with such a provision. A tax-statute, it is now well understood, calls for a construction in accordance with the legislative intent as manifested by the statutory language so as to effectuate the legislative purpose bearing in mind that the tax laws are enacted for practical ends. The true meaning must be d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wholly unable to find any cogent or persuasive reason to agree with this submission, which I unhesitatingly repel. I have come to this conclusion independently, but, luckily, the matter is not res integra, for, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in S. Mariappa Nadar v. State of Madras[1962] 13 S.T.C. 371; A.I.R. 1962 Mad. 290.has upheld a tax imposed on a sale held in the State of Madras in the course of inter-State trade when the goods sold were moved into the State of Jammu and Kashmir, where that movement terminated. For the foregoing reasons, all the four questions are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the petitioners in all the four references. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, however, I make no order as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
