MAHAVIR INDUSTRIES Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. K. C. Bhandari, the learned counsel for the sales tax department, was asked to put in appearance on behalf of non-petitioners Nos. 2 and 3. Non-petitioner No. 1, the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer ("the Board"), has been impleaded as a non-petitioner as the order dated 16th October, 1984, was passed by a Division Bench of the Board which is under challenge in revision.

(2.) MR. Rajendra Mehta, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that this revision is squarely covered by the decision rendered in Commercial Taxes Officer v. Swastik Gum Industries (D. B. Civil Sales Tax Case No. 60 of 1980 decided on 30th July, 1985) [1986] 61 STC 83 and submits that the revision may finally be disposed of at the admission stage. We have heard MR. Rajendra Mehta, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and MR. K. C. Bhandari, the learned counsel for non-petitioners Nos. 2 and 3.

(3.) FROM the aforesaid three decisions of the Allahabad High Court, it is clear that the fields of operation of sections 4 and 5 of the Act are distinct and separate. The question before the Board and which has been canvassed before us is whether the word "gowar" in entry 9 includes gowar churi or korma or not. The notification issued under section 5 of the Act prescribing the rate of tax on gowar will not have overriding effect on entry 9 of the Schedule appended to the Act which deals with exemption. The notification on which reliance has been placed by the Board will not nullify entry 9 of the Schedule so far as the exclusion of gowar from cattle feeds is concerned. As stated above the fields of operation of sections 4 and 5 of the Act are altogether different. We agree with the reasons given in the aforesaid three decisions of the Allahabad High Court and adopt them for resolving the question before us. We are of the opinion that the view taken by the Board in its order dated 16th October, 1984, on the basis of the notification dated 19th May, 1972, that gowar churi or korma is not exempt from payment of tax is erroneous in law. For the reasons mentioned in the Commercial Taxes Officer's case (D. B. Civil Sales Tax Case No. 60 of 1980 decided on 30th July, 1985) [1986] 61 STC 83 we are of the opinion that gowar churi or korma is not included in gowar when gowar has been excluded from cattle feeds which are exempt from payment of sales tax.