GANDA SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will deal with Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 3264, 3265, 3521, 3791, 3848 and 3918 of 1972 and Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 352, 353 and 354 of 1973. In all these petitions following common question of law was referred by a Division Bench to a larger Bench:

(2.) AT the time of arguments, it was brought to our notice by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. R. N. Narula, that in the case of dealers, who were taxed for the sale of threshers and discs, the Government of Haryana issued instructions to the Excise and Taxation authorities, - -vide Memo No. 2999 -ET, (5) -74, dated June 4, 1974, directing that the Government has decided to exempt from, sales tax, for period prior to October 17, 1972, the date of passing/publication of the Haryana General Sales Tax (Haryana Amendment and Validation) Act, 1972 (Haryana Act No. 19 of 1972), the dealers who did not charge sales tax on sale of discs and threshers from the customers, considering these sales to be exempt from sales tax. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners, therefore, has submitted that in view of this decision of the State Government, the Petitioners in all the writ petitions except Petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 3848 of 1972, who were being subjected to sales tax for the sale of threshers and discs and who claimed that they have not charged sales tax from the customers, will not be subject to sales tax and, therefore, the common question of law referred to Full Bench in all these writ petitions, except in Civil Writ Petition No, 3848 of 1972, does not survive for determination. The learned Advocate General, Haryana, has conceded that in view of the above -mentioned decision of the Government if the authorities come to the conclusion that a dealer has not charged sales -tax from the customers, considering the sales of threshers and discs to be exempt from sales -tax before October, 17, 1972 no sales -tax will be charged from such a dealer.

(3.) AS far as Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 3265, 3791 and 3918 of 1972; are concerned, the learned Counsel - for the Petitioners has submitted that in addition to the point referred to the Full Bench, which point in these petitions also does not survive for deternation in view of the decision of the State Government referred to above another point which survives for determination in these petitions is whether the Petitioners who purchased raw material on the basis of the registration certificates and who manufactured the goods which were mentioned in the registration certificate though the said manufactured goods were tax free could be proceeded against under Section 5(2)(a) (ii) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, and thus could they be charged with additional liability of to on the ground of misuse of the registration certificates. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that this point is covered in favour of the Petitioners by a Full Bench decision of this Court in Punjab Khandsari Udyog v. State , (1972) 30 S.T.C. 414. This contention is being raised to assail the view of the authorities that the raw material purchased on the strength of registration certificate for use in manufacture could be utilised only for manufacturing of taxable goods. Since the whole case has not been referred to the Full Bench and only a question of law, mentioned above, has been referred to, this Bench will not be in a position to examine the merits of the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners in the bunch of these three writ petitions. The said matter shall have to be gone into by the Division Bench and, therefore, these three writ petitions are referred back to the Division Bench for determination on merits.