KANDOI KABLIWALA Vs. ACTO PALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two sales tax revisions have been filed under Section 15, Rajasthan Sales Tax Act (hereinafter to be called 'the Act') against the common order of the learned Rajasthan Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer (hereinafter to be called 'the Tribunal') dated December 12, 1985. The facts of the case giving rise to these revisions may be summarised thus :

(2.) THE sales of 'desi Sweetmeats and Namkins' were exempted from tax vide notifications No. F5 (16) FDCT/69-13 and 14 dated April 1, 1969 issued under Section 4 (2) of the Act (printed at Serial Nos. 165 & 166 of Volume II of Law of Sale & Purchase Tax in Rajasthan by Jai Kumar Jain ). THE notification No- 14 relating to the 'namkins' was withdrawn vide notification No. F5 (24) FDCT/72-11i dated April 26, 1972 (printed at Serial No. 251n THE notification No. 13 relating to the 'desi Sweetmeats' was also withdraw), by issuing a corrigendum to the said notification dated April 26, 1972 vide notification dated October 5, 1972 (printed at Serial No. 263 of the said volume) THE business premises of the assessee - appellant was surveyed on January 18, 1973, October 30, 1974 and November 11, 1974 and accounts books were seized. THE assessing authority held the appellant liable for registration as a dealer under the Act w. e. f. 26 4. 1972 by his order dated January 14, 1974. It further held that the assessee effected sales to the extent of Rs. 1 lac during the period for 26. 4. 72 to 31. 3. 73 and accordingly imposed tax and penalty by his assessment order dated September 24, 1975. THE assessee filed appeals against these orders before the Deputy Commissioner (Apeals), Jodhpur. Both the appeals were allowed by him by his common order dated January 31, 1977 and the said orders of the assessing authority were set aside. THE Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Pali filed revisions before the Revenue Board, Ajmer against these appellate orders. On the establishment of the Tribunal in the year 1985, the revisions were received by the Tribunal and were registered as appeals as required under Section 13 (1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984. After hearing the parties, the Tribunal held that the assessee was liable to pay tax with effect from April 26, 1972, sales of the Desi Sweemeats to the extent of Rs. 60,000/- only were effect during the period 26. 4. 72 to 31. 3. 73, the assessee is not liable to pay any penalty and accordingly allowed the appeals partly by its common order dated December 31, 1985.

(3.) THE said corrigendum notification dated October 5, 1972 is infact an addendum to the notification dated April 26, 1972 and not a corrigendum. As already observed above, separate notifications No. 13 and 14 were issued on April 1, 1969 under Section 4 (2) of the Act exempting the sales of 'desi Sweetmeats' and 'namkins'. By notification dated April 26, 1972, notification No. 14 relating to 'namkins' was only rescinded. It is clear from its perusal that it was correct and complete so far 'namkins' were concerned and it did not require any correction. THEre was no question of issuing any corrigendum to it. By the subsequent notification dated October 5, 1972, the figures '69-14' appearing in the notification dated 26. 4. 1972 were substituted by the figures and word '69-13 and 14'. By this corrigendum notification, the notification relating to the exemption of 'desi Sweetmeats' was added in the notification dated 26. 4. 72. In any view of the matter, it cannot be said that it was a corrigendum to the previous notification dated April 26, 1972. Two notifications dealt with two different commodities, number 13 dealt with 'desi Sweetmeats' and number 14 dealt with 'namkins'. THEre was no question of any correction to the notification relating to Namkins. THEse two commodities namely 'desi Sweetmeats' and 'namkins' were exempted through two different notifications. THE notification relating to 'namkins' was rescinded by notification dated 26. 4. 1972 Similar notification could be issued on this dated rescinding notification relating to the 'desi Sweetmeats' and admittedly this was not done. By issuing notification dated October 5, 1972, the exemption from the payment of tax on the sale of 'desi Sweetmeats' could not be withdrawn with retrospective effect. As such the assessee could not be held liable for the' payment of tax on the sales of 'desi Sweetmeats' with effect from April 26, 1972. It could be held liable with effect from October 5, 1972.