STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. PATURI NARAYANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A very important question of law arises for decision in these Second Appeals viz., whether a suit is maintainable in a civil Court by a dealer under the Madras General Sales Tax Act for refund of sales tax illegally collected under a provision of the said Act, which is ultra vires. This question was left open by the Supreme Court in Subbayya Chetty & Sons v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1963) 2 SCJ 725 : (1964) 1 MLJ (SC) 5 : (1964) 1 AnWR(SC) 5 :(1963)14 STC 680 : (1963) 50 ITR 93, and Karnala Mills Ltd. v. State of Bombay (1965) 16 STG 613 : (1965) 57 ITR 43 : AIR 1965 SC 1942 under rule 1 of the Appellate Side rules, I direct these cases to be posted before a Bench.

(2.) Pursuant to the aforesaid order the appeals there came in for hearing before Ihe Bench.

(3.) The Judgment of the Bench was delivered by Jaganmohan Reddy, J.-In all these three Second Appeals, an important question of law has been referred to the Bench by one of us, Chandrasekhara Sastry, J., as to whether a suit is maintainable in a civil Court by a dealer under the Madras General Sales Tax Act for refund of sales tax illegally collected under a provision of the said Act, which is ultra vires. This question was left open by the Supreme Court in Subbayya Chetty & Sons v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1963) 2 SCJ 725 : (1964) 1 MLJ (SC) 5 :(1964) 1 AnWR(SC) 5 :(1963)14 STC 680 : (1963) 50 ITR 93, and Kamala Mills Ltd. v. State of Bombay (1965) 16 STG 613 : (1965) 57 ITR 43 : AIR 1965 SC 1942. In these appeals, the assessee was charged sales tax on works contract.