Jagdish Sahai, J. - (1.) The petitioner, Messrs J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) is a public limited liability company having its registered office at Kamla Tower, Kanpur, and carries on the business of manufacture and sale of cotton textiles, tiles etc. On 21st June, 1957, the petitioner made an application to the first respondent, the Sales Tax Officer, Sector II, Kanpur, for registration under Section 7(1)/7(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner specified the following goods or classes of goods which it ordinarily purchased in the course of inter-State trade- Cotton staple fibre, yarn, wastes, coal, petrol, machinery, elec-tricals, spares, hardwares, dyes and colours, chemicals, auxiliaries, oils, lubricants, tallows, starches, woollen clothings, gums, clays, salt, beltings, bobbins, shuttles, wooden accessories and other mill stores for manufacturing cloth, yarn, tiles and paints etc.
(2.) The first respondent granted a certificate of registration No. K.R. 771, dated 8th July, 1957. On 30th July, 1958, the petitioner made another application to the first respondent to amend the aforesaid certificate of registration so as to include the following goods also in the list of goods specified therein, on the ground that the petitioner had omitted to specify the same in its original application : Industrial gases, drawing instruments, photographic materials, packing materials including wood, paper, straw and cardboards etc. and building materials including iron, steel, cement, lime, fire-bricks and refractories.
(3.) On 25th September, 1958, the first respondent amended the certificate of registration as prayed by the petitioner. Late in July, 1961, the petitioner received a notice No. Central/57-58/ST-2-598, dated 19th July, 1961, from the first respondent calling upon it to show cause as to why the aforesaid certificate of registration be not amended so as to exclude drawing instruments, photographic materials, building materials including iron, steel, cement and lime, and also sent a detailed list of goods covered under the term "electricals" which were used in the goods for sale. In the notice it was also stated that coal being a declared commodity, it could not be purchased for any purpose other than for resale and, therefore, the inclusion of coal in the said certificate of registration had been cancelled. By means of the letter dated 24th July, 1961, the petitioner replied to the notice stating that drawing instruments were required to prepare designs which were very necessary in the manufacture of textiles and without which it would not be possible to cater to public preference and that photographic material was also required to prepare the said designs and further that building materials including iron, cement and lime were required for setting up the factory building wherein machinery was installed for manufacturing goods, that these materials were also needed for installation of the said plant and machinery and further that the cement and lime were required for manufacturing tiles sold by the petitioner. In respect of the electrical goods, the petitioner stated that various electrical accessories were always required for proper lighting so necessary during the manufacturing processes. The petitioner also contended that inasmuch as the original certificate of registration was issued after necessary inquiries and that as the amendments had also been effected after due enquiry, there was no reason to exclude any goods from the scope of the certificate of registration. Thereafter nothing more was done in the matter until late in June, 1962, when the letter dated 23rd June, 1962, was received by the petitioner stating therein that the explanation submitted by the petitioner was not found satisfactory and that the certificate of registration should be submitted, failing which it would be cancelled. On 17th July, 1962, which was the date fixed by the Sales Tax Officer in the aforesaid proceedings, the petitioner appeared before the Sales Tax Officer and the latter permitted the petitioner to file a written explanation. On the next date fixed (23rd July, 1962), the petitioner's representative appeared before the Sales Tax Officer and waited there up to 3 p.m. The Sales Tax Officer did not turn up. By its letter dated 27th July, 1962, the petitioner wrote to the Sales Tax Officer informing him that its representative had waited for him on 23rd July, 1962, and that as he was absent, some other date may be fixed in the matter. It is alleged by the petitioner that the officials of the Sales Tax Office refused to take delivery of the letter with the result that it was sent under registered post the same day. On 31st July, 1962, the petitioner submitted a representation to the second respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., placing before him all the facts and contending that the certificate of registration was not liable to be amended by the Sales Tax Officer. The same day the second respondent passed the following order : Office to report and ask the S.T.O. to keep in abeyance deletion of items.;