PARSHVA PROPERTIES LTD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this reference under Section 33(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter called the Act), the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, has referred the following question of law for our opinion :

(2.) The relevant facts for the purpose of the question under consideration may be stated thus. The assessee, a registered dealer under the Act, was originally assessed for the year 1962-63, with which year we are concerned in this case, by the assessing authority by his order dated 3rd November, 1965, in which a claim of Rs. 29,32,483.17 for concessional rate of tax at one per centum under Section 6A of the Act was admitted in full for the period 1st November, 1962, to 31st March, 1963. It may be mentioned here that Section 6A was inserted in the statute book with effect from 1st November, 1962. Subsequently, proceedings under Section 18(1) of the Act were initiated by the assessing officer on 30th November, 1965, on the ground that the concessional rate of tax was wrongly allowed to the assessee from 1st November, 1962, the date on which Section 6A came into force. The assessing officer was of the view that the allowance of concessional rate of tax should have been made from 3rd January, 1963, which was the date on which rules 4A and 8A of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), were notified. These proceedings culminated in a revised order of assessment dated 23rd December, 1965, in which the concessional rate of tax was allowed to the assessee only on Rs. 15,84,397.71 being the turnover on the commodities specified for the period between 3rd January, 1963, and 31st March, 1963. The dealer having gone up in appeal to the Deputy Commissioner and its appeal having failed, it went up in revision to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by its order dated 28th November, 1970, held that the assessee was entitled to the concessional rate of tax at one per centum with effect from 14th December, 1962. The contention of the assessee that it was entitled to such a concessional rate with effect from 1st November, 1962, was repelled as was also the contention on behalf of the department that the dealer, on the facts of the present case, was entitled to such a concessional rate with effect from 3rd January, 1963, only.

(3.) The question for determination in this reference really turns upon a true construction of the provisions of Section 6A(1)(b) and 6A(2) read with rules 4A and 8A. But before adverting to the relevant provisions of law mentioned above, the admitted facts in this case and the rival contentions may be mentioned as these. Section 6A of the Act, as already stated, was inserted by Section 5 of Bihar Act 20 of 1962 and by a notification dated 27th October, 1962, it was made to come into force with effect from 1st November, 1962. Rules 4A and 8A in the Rules relating to the certificate under Section 6A were inserted by Notification No. STGL-AR-1021/62 C. T.-ll F. T. dated 3rd January, 1963, published in the Bihar Gazette, Extraordinary, of the same date. The last mentioned notification did not specify the date from which these rules were to come into force. The assessee's claim related to its sales to two registered dealers which were two firms, namely, Messrs. Rohtas Industries Ltd. and Messrs. Asoka Cement Ltd. Both these firms filed application for issue of certificates under Section 6A and the certificates were issued to both of them on 14th December, 1962, making them operative with effect from 1st November, 1962. In the required declaration submitted by the assessee in form IX a claim was made with regard to the concessional rate of tax on account of sales having been made to the aforesaid two firms for the period commencing from 1st November, 1962, which was the date from which the certificates had been made effective, although the date of issue of the certificates to those two firms was, as already stated above, 14th December, 1962. The learned Standing Counsel I for the department contended that reading of the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules mentioned above together would lead to a conclusion that the date, from which the certificates under Section 6A granted to the purchasers, namely, the aforesaid two manufacturing firms ought to be treated as valid, was the date of issue of such certificates, i. e., 14th December, 1962, and that no retrospective or retroactive operation could be given to the validity of such certificates with effect from 1st November, 1962, which the competent authority, in the first instance, had purported to do. Mr. Ramanugrah Prasad, the learned counsel for the assessee, however, contended that on a reading of the provisions aforesaid, there was no bar against the authorities concerned under the provisions of the Act or the Rules so as to preclude them from granting a certificate under Section 6A(1)(b) with effect from a date prior to the date of its issue extending back either up to the date of the commencement of the certificate of registration of the purchaser (as a registered dealer) under the Act or the date of commencement of Section 6A itself, whichever was later. As in the present case both the date of commencement of the statutory provision and the certificate under Section 6A(1) of the Act were with effect from 1st November, 1962, for the purposes of Section 6A, the competent authorities had not in any way acted without jurisdiction or in any manner illegally in making the certificate operative with effect from 1st November, 1962.