CHAUHAN, J. - (1.) THESE writ petitions have been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 25. 8. 1998 (Annx. 9) and 16. 7. 1999 (Annx. 10) and for holding that the petitioners are entitled for exemption of Sales Tax under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, the Central Sales Tax Act and notification dated 27. 3. 1995 and other relevant notifications.
(2.) THIS is a strange case where a relief has been sought from the writ court without there being any assessment order, whatsoever. The petitioners made an application before the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, III Division, Rajsamand, for granting them a certificate that they are entitled for exemption from sales tax under the aforesaid notification, for the purpose of business of stone-cutting etc. Said applications have been rejected vide order dated 16. 07. 1999 (Annx. 10), holding that the petitioners were not entitled for such a relief. The said order has been passed not in any assessment proceedings, rather in an independent proceeding, initiated by the petitioners themselves by filing applications. Shri Kothari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, is not in a position to state as to under what circumstances such an application was filed and under what provision of the statute it was maintainable. Similarly, Shri Lodha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, is not in a position to explain as to why the said applications, if not maintainable under any statutory provision, were not rejected as not maintainable and what was the occasion for the authority concerned to pass the impugned orders on merit. Admittedly, the authority did not pass any orders while making assessment for any particular period under the Acts. The said applications were certainly filed by the petitioners for collateral purpose and petitioners certainly did not file applications with clean hands, clean mind and with clean objective. Shri Kothari has submitted that the State of Rajasthan issued a circular dated 27. 3. 1995 (Annx. 5) granting exemption of sales tax on the sale of products manufactured in the State and sold by the institutions, co-operative societies and individuals, registered under the said Act and also with the Khadi and Village Industries Commission constituted under the Khadi & Village Industries Act, 1956 or in the Rajasthan Khadi & Village Industries Board constituted under the Rajasthan Khadi & Village Industries Board Act 1955 and, in whose favour certificate of registration have been issued by the authorities competent to do so, to the extent of turn-over of Rs. 30 lacs and, if the turn-over is above the said limit, tax shall be leviable over and above the said limit of Rs. 30 lacs. In pursuance of the said notification, the Commissioner of Sales Tax has also issued a circular providing for the said exemption. The petitioners claim that they have been granted certificate by the Rajasthan Khadi & Village Industries Board which is in consonance with the said Govt. notification and the circular issued by the Commissioner, Sales Tax and thus, they are entitled to claim the said exemption. Even if it is so, the said relief can be claimed only when the assessment is made. So far as the legal position is concerned, it is settled proposition of law that in fiscal matters, the notification issued by the Government or the circulars issued by the higher authorities may have a binding force, provided the same is in consonance with law; as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. P. Vargehese vs. I. T. O. (1), Keshavji Raghavji & Co. vs. C. I. T. , (2), C. I. T. vs. Vasudeo vs. Dempo, (3), Kerala Financial Corpn. vs. C. I. T. , (4), Ranadey Micronutrients vs. C. C. E. (5), Poulose & Mathen vs. C. C. E. , (6), British Machinary Supplies Co. vs. Union of India, (7), South India Viscose Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (8), Collector of Central Excise, Patna vs. Usha Martin Industries, (9) and C. C. E. vs. Jayant Dalal (P) Ltd. In Bengal Iron Corpn. and anr. vs. Commercial Tax Officer and others, (11), Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under: " 18. So far as clarifications/circulars issued by the Central Government and/or State Government are concerned, they represent merely their understanding of the statutory provisions. They are not binding upon the Courts. It is true that those clarifications and circulars were communicated to the concerned dealers but even so nothing prevents the State from recovering the tax, if in truth such tax was leviable according to law. There can be no estoppel against the statute. The understanding of the Government, whether in favour or against the assessee, is nothing more than its understanding and opinion. It is doubtful whether such clarifications and circulars bind the quasi-judicial functioning of the authorities under the Act. While acting in quasi-judicial capacity, they are bound by law and not by any administrative instructions, opinions, clarifications or circulars. . . . " However, this aspect has to be examined at the stage of assessment and not at this stage. Thus, the petitions are disposed of, with the observation that at the time of making the assessment, the Assessing Authority shall examine the case of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law/the notification issued by the State Government, ignoring the contents of Annex. 9 and 10. No order as to costs. . ;