- (1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE petitioner No. 1 carries on the business of commission agency in the name and style of petitioner No. 2 and the place of business is No. 18, Amartolla Street, Calcutta. The petitioner supplies goods to the traders in Uttar Pradesh and also other places in India. On the 21st of october, 1954, the petitioner No. 2 received a notice from the Sales Tax Officer, U. P. , (Calcutta)to file a return of the complete turnover of the previous year, under the U. P. Sales Tax Act of 1948. The petitioner No. 1 was registered previously as a "dealer" under Section 8a of the U. P. Sales Tax Act and this registration was valid upto 31st March, 1955. The notice was followed by a press note dated 21st November, 1954, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. , in which it was stated that the ex. U. P. dealers were also liable to pay sales tax on the goods that were delivered in the territory of the State of U. P. for consumption therein. Certain concessions were to be granted to these traders if they carried out the directions contained in the press note and submitted the returns and paid the dues within a reasonable time. A copy of the press note was sent to the petitioner as well by the Sales Tax Officer at Calcutta, drawing the petitioner's attention to the concessions contained in the press note. It appears that the petitioner did not file any return and on the 21st February, 1955, the Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle, Kanpur, issued an order to the petitioner asking him to file the return of his turnover and to appear before the officer on 24th March, 1955. On the 2nd March, 1955, the petitioner sent a cheque for Rs. 500 in part payment of the tax due for the period 1st October to 31st December, 1954. This cheque was sent through the Kirana Commission Agents Association, and was accompanied by a letter in which it was stated that the petitioner's cheque along with certain others was being sent, but the payments were made without prejudice to the rights of these traders to challenge the imposition of the U. P. sales tax upon them. The present petition was filed on the 13th of April, 1955, and the prayers contained in the petition are that the notices issued by the Sales Tax officer be quashed and a writ of mandamus be issued prohibiting the opposite parties from taking proceedings against the petitioners under the U. P. Sales Tax Act.
(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that they are carrying on business in Calcutta and they work as commission agents. Orders are placed with them for the supply of the goods by constituents in Uttar Pradesh and the petitioners then forward the goods to these constituents which are delivered to them at the places where the constituents carry on their business. The transaction of the purchase is said to be completed in Calcutta though the goods are delivered in the State of U. P. and other places. It is argued that on these facts the U. P. State has no jurisdiction to levy a tax on these sales and the U. P. Sales Tax Act would not be valid if it really provides for the imposition of sales tax on the petitioners who carry on their business outside the State, the business being in the nature of inter-State trade. It is said that Article 286 of the Constitution prohibits the imposition of any such tax on a trade of this nature. It is also argued that the petitioners are not dealers within the meaning of Section 2 (c) of the U. P. Sales tax Act, nor was the appointment of a Sales Tax Officer by the U. P. Government in Calcutta a valid appointment. The latter two points are mainly based on the ground that the U. P. Government has no jurisdiction to register persons carrying on their trade outside the State as dealers, nor have they any jurisdiction to appoint Sales Tax Officers in territories outside Uttar pradesh.;