NEW SWASTIK FLOUR MILL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of Item 138 of the II Schedule [presently Item No.8(iii) of Part-C of II Schedule] to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the State Act' for short), which authorise the levy of tax under the Act on Atta, Maida and Soji produced out of wheat, which is a declared goods under Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act (the Central Act' for short), on the ground that it is inconsistent with Section 15 of the Central Act, and to issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the assessment orders under which tax has been levied on these items under the State Act.

(2.) The facts of the case, are as follow: The petitioners are dealers registered under the State Act, engaged in the manufacture of wheat products. They purchase wheat either within the State of Karnataka or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, paying tax under Section 5(4) of the State Act read with Entry 9 of the Fourth Schedule of the State Act. They convert the tax paid wheat into Atta, Maida or Soji and sell the same. The Sales Tax Authorities have not only levied tax treating each of the aforesaid items as a separate goods falling under Entry 138 of the II Schedule to the State Act but also levied turnover tax on the sale turnover of each of these items under Section 6B of the State Act. The petitioners have filed these Petitions contending that the said assessment and demand made by the Sales Tax Authorities in respect of their turnover of wheat products is illegal and ultra vires, on the ground that 'wheat" is one of the declared goods vide Section 14 of the Central Act and it includes Atta, Maida and Soji and therefore tax levied on these items cannot exceed 4% and further the tax cannot be levied at more than one point. The respondents contend that this stand taken by the petitioners is not sustainable in law and each one of the items namely, Atta, Maida and Soji derived from wheat are goods different from 'wheat' and therefore liable to be taxed under the State Act unrestricted by the provisions of the Central Act, both regarding rate as also number of points at which it could be taxed.

(3.) In order to understand the contentions of the respective parties, it is necessary to note the following provisions of law having a bearing on the contentions of the parties. Section 15 of the Central Act reads as follows:-