Decided on January 16,1969



- (1.) IN this reference under Section 44 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act 1958, at the instance of the assessee, the Madhya Pradesh Lac Industries, the question which the Board of Revenue (Sales Tax Tribunal) has referred to this court for decision is: "whether or not the liability to be assessed Under Section 4 (6) accrues only if the Registration Certificate of the dealer is in strict conformity with the Registration Certificate in the prescribed form, namely, Form II as amended after the addition of Section 4 (6) to the C. P. and Berar sales Tax Act, 1947," (sic)
(2.) THE material facts are that the assessee is a registered dealer engaged in the business of purchase of stick lac. refining it and selling the product. In the certificate of registration, which was Issued to the assessee on 5th May, 1962, lac, filter cloth, Arsenic and other chemicals and charcoal were specified as goods which the assessee could purchase free of tax for the purpose of manufacture of goods for sale. During the period from 11th April 1954 to 31st March 1955 the assessee purchased these goods free of sales tax from the sellers after giving the necessary declaration. After purchasing the aforesaid goods, the assessee did not use them for the purpose for which they had been purchased and despatched the goods outside the State of Madhya Pradesh. When the sales-tax authorities sought to levy on the assessee purchase tax under Section 4 (6) of the C. P. and Berar sales Tax Act, 1947, the assessee raised the objection that under Section 4 (6) of the Act, as amended by the Madhya Pradesh Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1953 (Act No. XX of 1953) no purchase tax could be imposed on it on the goods purchased by it free of tax as those goods had not been "specified" in its certificate of registration as intended for use by it as raw materials in the manufacture of any goods for sale by actual delivery in Madhya Pradesh for the purpose of consumption in that State as required by the amended Section 4 (6 ). This contention was overruled by the Sales Tax Officer, Raipur, and was also rejected by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner Raipur and the Board of Revenue in the appeals which the assessee then preferred.
(3.) IT is no doubt true that the certificate which was issued to the assessee in 1962 did not contain the specification of goods as contemplated by the amended Section 2 (j) (a) (ii) or Section 4 (6) of the Act. The certificate which was issued to the assessee was in relation to the unamended provisions. But the fact that the goods were not specified in the registration certificate as required by Section 4 (6) of the act does not in any way absolve the assessee of any liability for payment of purchase tax when admittedly he gave declarations to the sellers at the time of purchasing the goods without payment of any tax that the goods purchased would be used in the manufacture of goods which would be sold by actual delivery in madhya Pradesh for purposes of consumption in the State and thereafter he did not use the goods purchased for this purpose but despatched them outside the state of Madhya Pradesh. Thus, all the conditions for imposition of purchase tax on the assessee under the amended Section 4 (6) were satisfied in the present case. As held by the Supreme Court in Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Punjab 16 STC 310 : (AIR 1965 SC 957) the registration certificate is only evidence that the assessee is a registered dealer for purposes of certain commodities to be used in manufacture and any defect in the registration certificate is not material.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.