STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. KISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for the revision of the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax/appeals/jodhpur dated 29. 3. 1961. The applicant is a Kirana merchant and Commission Agent. In respect of his sales for the period 3. 11. 1956 to 23. 10. 1957 assessment was made in such a way as to levy tax at the last point up to 5. 6. 1957 and on the first point from 6. 6. 1957 onwards on dry fruits and other commodities listed in the Essential Goods (Declaration and Regulation of Tax on Sales or Purchase) Act 1952. In appeal, the learned Deputy Commissioner held that tax should have been levied throughout at the last point. It is against this appellate order that the present application for revision has been brought.

(2.) TO decide the question whether tax should have been levied at the last point of sale upto 5. 6. 1957 and thereafter at the first point, it is necessary to examine the position of law as it then existed. Sec. 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act 1954, as it existed on 5. 6. 1957 said that tax will be payable at such a single point in the series of sales as may be prescribed under the Rules. This was subject to the proviso that tax in respect of goods listed in the Essential Goods (D. R. T. S. P.) Act 1952 shall, unless otherwise notified with concurrence of the Central Government, be payable at the last point in the series of sales. The Essential Goods (D. R. T. S. P) Act 1952 was repealed on 1. 1. 1957 and Sec. 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act 1954 was amended so as to delete the reference to the Essential Goods Act 1952. However, in Rule 15 of the Rules framed under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act 1954, reference to the Essential Goods Act was not deleted until 12. 1. 1958. Thus the position is that Rule 15 as it existed before 12. 2. 1958 laid down the general proposition that tax would be payable at the first point of sale except in the case of goods listed in the Essential Goods Act. The contention of the learned counsel for the State is that since Sec. 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act had been amended with effect from 6. 6. 1957 and the reference to the Essential Goods Act deleted, the reference to the Essential Goods Act in Rules 15 became infructuous. The learned counsel for the opposite party however wishes to take advantage of the time lag between the amendment of Sec. 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and consequential amendment in Rule 15. It is his argument that references to a repealed statute should continue to be in force despite the repeal. I am unable to persuade myself to agree with this argument. The rules are framed to carry out the purposes of an Act and are subordinate to it. Since Sec. 5 of the Act of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was amended with effect from 6. 6. 1957, the exception mentioned in Rule 15 with regard to goods listed in the Essential Goods Act became inconsistent with Sec. 5, and therefore ceased to have the force of law. The argument of the learned counsel for the opposite party would have had force if Sec. 5 had not been amended despite the repeal of the Essential Goods Act, and in that case, the exception in favour of the goods listed in the Essential Goods Act would have continued in force.