Ranawat, C. J - (1.) THIS is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 133 (i) (c) of the Constitution from a judgment of this Court in reference from the Sales Tax Commissioner under sec. 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act of 1954.
(2.) IT is alleged by the State that the consequences of the statement of law made by this Court are far-reaching and having regard to the importance of the issue, leave to appeal may be granted. Mr. Sumer Chand appearing on behalf of the opposite party has raised a preliminary objection that the judgment of this Court cannot be considered to be final inasmuch as the jurisdiction exercised by this Court is only consultative or advisory and the judgments therefore, by itself cannot affect the rights and liabilities of the parties in the case who shall be governed by the judgment of the Sales Tax Commissioner when granted in accordance with the law laid down by this Court. Mr. Sumer Chand has referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Prem Chand Satramdas vs. The State of Bihar (l) and Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North, Kutch & Saurashtra vs. Patel and Co. , Jamnager (2 ). Mr. Kan Singh for the State has tried to distinguish these cases on the basis of the language of sec. 15 sub-sec. (5) of the Sales Tax Act and he has urged that the judgment in cases of reference under sec. 15 of the Sales Tax Act should be deemed to be final for purposes of grant of leave to the Supreme Court. Sec. 15 sub-sec. (5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act is in the same language as that of sec. 66 (i) of the Indian Income-Tax Act of 1922 except that in the Income-Tax Act the words are "the Appellate Tribunal which shall pass such orders as are necessary to dispose of the case conformably to such judgment" and the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act provides : "the Commissioner shall dispose of the case accordingly. " Even though the words used in the two Acts are not the same in this respect the meaning of the two expressions is not much different. The authority under the Income-Tax Act or the Sales Tax Act has to pass a final order in accordance with or in conformity of the judgment of the High Court under reference. The change in the language of sec. 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act does not distinguish the decisions of the Supreme Court referred to by Mr. Sumerchand. The jurisdiction of the High Court under sec. 15 is evidently an advisory or consultative one and the rights and liabilities of the parties are not determined by the judgment of this Court. In fact, those rights and liabilities shall be determined under an order of the Sales Tax Commissioner when it is made in accordance with the law laid down by the judgment of this Court. Supreme Court approved the decision of the Privy Council in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Chief Revenue Authority Bombay (50 Indian Appeals 212) and held as under : "it seems to us that the order appealed against in this case, cannot be regarded as a final order, because it does not of its own force bind or affect the rights of the parties All that the High Court is required to do under sec. 21, Bihar Sales Tax Act, is to decide the question of law raised and send a copy of its judgment to the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue then has to dispose of the case in the light of the judgment of the High Court. It is true that the Board's order is based on what is stated by the High Court to be the correct legal position, but the fact remains that the order of the High Court standing by itself does not affect the rights of the parties, and the final order in the matter is the order which is passed ultimately by the Board of Revenue. " This decision was again affirmed by the Supreme Court in the other decision mentioned above. Mr. Kan Singh also had to concede that having regard to the law as laid down by the decisions of the Supreme Court, the order of the High Court passed in reference under sec. 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act cannot be considered to be a final one for purposes of leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The preliminary objection is allowed and the application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court is dismissed. .;