COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX Vs. INDOKEM PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which has been referred to us in this reference under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, is,

(2.) In order to appreciate the facts which have given rise to this reference it is necessary first to know certain relevant provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, and the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1959, framed thereunder. The said Act came into force on 1st January, 1960, which date is referred to in the said Act as "the appointed day". Under the said Act a dealer whose turnover of all sales or of all purchases in the particular year specified in section 3 exceeds the limit laid down in sub-section (4) of that section becomes liable to pay tax under the said Act. Under section 22 no dealer, while being liable to pay tax under the said Act, is to carry on business as a dealer unless he possesses a valid certificate of registration as provided by the said Act. Under section 77(1)(b) any registration certificate issued by or under any of the laws repealed by the said Act, which was in force immediately before 1st January, 1960, is on that date to be deemed, so far as the liability to tax under sub-section (1) of section 3 is concerned, to be a certificate of registration issued under the said Act. One of the Acts repealed by the said Act was the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. Under rule 7(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1959, a dealer having places of business within the jurisdiction of different registering authorities is required to make an application for registration separately to each such authority in respect of his places of business (not being merely a warehouse) within the jurisdiction of that authority. The position under rule 3(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax (Registration, Licensing and Authorization) Rules, 1954, framed under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, was the same. In respect of his different places of business which have been registered separately as aforesaid, a dealer is required, under the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1959, to file separate returns unless under the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 32 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, the Commissioner has given him permission to furnish a consolidated return relating to all or any of the places of business of the dealer in the State for a particular period or for such different periods to such authority as he may direct. As separate returns have to be filed in respect of each place of business situate within the jurisdiction of different Sales Tax Officers, the assessment in respect of such returns would be separate. Rule 40(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1959, as it was in operation at the material time, provided as follows :

(3.) Under rule 45(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1959, in order to become entitled to a drawback, set-off or refund under the said rule 40(1) a dealer has to comply with certain conditions, one of these conditions being that he is to furnish to the Sales Tax Officer on or after the appointed day, namely, 1st January, 1960, but before 26th March, 1960, a statement in form 32 where the selling dealer has recovered from him any amount by way of tax under any earlier law, that is, under any of the Acts repealed by the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. Such a dealer also would not be entitled to any such drawback, set-off or refund unless he had maintained a true account in chronological order of all the purchases of goods made by him, and which were held by him on 1st january, 1960, showing in such accounts the particulars specified by the said rule 45(1).