(1.) In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction as the Court deems fit directing the respondent to effect necessary corrections in the order of assessment No. DR/CT/(iii)T. 46 dated 15th May, 1961, in pursuance of the order of this Court in Writ Petition No. 916 and to refund to him the excess tax collected.
(2.) Among other things, the petitioner deals in cotton and groundnut seeds. For the period from 24th October, 1957, till 11th November, 1958, his purchase transactions relating to cotton and groundnut seeds were assessed to sales tax under section 5(4) read with Schedule 4 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, to be hereinafter referred to as the Act. At the time of the assessment, section 7 of the Act read as follows :-
(3.) On the basis of this provision, the petitioner contended before the Commercial Tax Officer, Haveri, that transactions were not exigible to tax. But it was negatived. Aggrieved by that decision, he came up directly to this Court in Writ Petition No. 916 of 1961, challenging the validity of the levy. By that time, this court had already pronounced on the scope of the aforementioned section 7 in C. Mallarappa & Sons v. The State of Mysore ([1962] 13 S.T.C. 400.). Therein this Court held that the department was not competent to levy sales tax in respect of purchase transaction. The Legislature amended section 7 of the Act by Act 32 of 1958. By that amendment in the place of the words "apply only to sales" the words "apply to sales or purchases" were submitted. The scope of that amendment again came up for consideration. This Court held that the amendment in question was prospective in character. Thereafter the State Legislature enacted Act 26 of 1962, the provisions of which among other things gave retrospective operation to the 1958 amendment referred to earlier. Section 6(1) of that Act (the amending Act 26 of 1962) provides :-