J.K. Ranka, J. - (1.) Instant sales tax revision petition by the petitioner -Revenue is directed against order of the Tax Board dated October 19, 2006 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer (for short, 'Tax Board") in Appeal No. 940/2006/Ajmer whereby the appeal filed by the respondent has been allowed. It is relevant for assessment year 2003 -04. The brief facts, which can be noticed in the present petition, are that the respondent -assessee is carrying on the business of repairing of motorcycles, cars and during the course of its business had purchased diesel, petrol, kerosene and other items which were being used for repair of the vehicles. The turnover of the assessee was to the tune of Rs. 51,30,506 and the assessee though did not put a claim of opting for exemption scheme of the turnover tax but in the return of income, it was claimed that it is entitled for the basic exemption to a dealer opting for such a scheme and at least the benefit of the exemption to the extent of Rs. 30 lac ought to have been allowed and on balance amount the turnover tax applicable at 0.25 per cent was required to be levied. However, the assessing officer (for short, "the AO") held that the turnover of the assessee was of petroleum products and the assessee does not enure for benefit and alternatively, the assessee did not file option in time and therefore, the AO discarded the claim of the assessee and levied tax, surcharge and interest. An appeal was filed by the assessee before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) (for short, "DC (A)"), who dismissed the same. However, on a further appeal by the assessee before the Tax Board, the claim was allowed and the Tax Board held that at least the assessee was entitled for the basic exemption limit relying upon a notification bearing No. F. 4(1)FD/Tax Div./2000 -301 dated March 30, 2000. The instant petition vide order dated February 7, 2014 on the following question of law: "Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Rajasthan Tax Board has not acted illegally and perversely in holding that turnover tax be levied over and above Rs. 30 lacs and not on the gross turnover -
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner -Revenue contended that the Tax Board has wrongly relied upon the notification (supra) when the said notification is inapplicable on the facts of the instant case. She contended that the benefit is available only for the dealers of petroleum products and not to the person who uses these petroleum products for repair or otherwise in its business. She further contended that the option had to be given in writing on or before the due date prescribed under the notification and since the assessee did not give any option, it was not entitled to any benefit arising out of the notification (supra).
(3.) None appears on behalf of the respondent -assessee despite service of notice.;