STATE OF MADRAS Vs. NALLAM JAGGIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Government is the appellant in this appeal, which arises out of the decree and judgment of the learned First Additional City Civil Judge decreeing the suit filed by the respondent in its entirety only disallowing costs. THE suit itself was brought by the respondent for a declaration that the levy of additional sales tax for the year ending with 31st March, 1938, by the defendant Government against the plaintiff was illegal and for the issue of an injunction restraining the defendant from collecting the same from the plaintiff. THE facts of the case have been set out in the judgment of the Court below in great detail and I do not think it is necessary for me to traverse the grounds over again.

(2.) THE point that arises for consideration is whether in view of the fact that admittedly the respondent did not comply with rule 18(3) of the Madras General Sales Tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, 1939, and also rule 9 of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules, 1939, the respondent would be entitled to the relief he claimed in the suit. THE respondent has been a dealer in groundnut oil and cake. In regard to the assessment of such dealers to sales tax, there are certain rules which have to be observed by the assessing authorities. Rule No. 5(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, 1939, lays down :-

(3.) IT is not disputed that the dealer in this case, who is the respondent, is registered as a manufacturer of groundnut oil and cake. Rule 18(2) is to the following effect :-