- (1.) THIS revision petition on behalf of M/s. Sarabhar Salts Ltd. Sarabhar is directed against the order of the Commercial Taxes Officer A-circle, Jaipur dated 5. 6. 65.
(2.) THE facts as supported by the affidavit of the petitioner filed in this Court and unrebutted by opposite party are that M/s. Hindustan Salts Ltd. a Government of India undertaking is the parent concern and that M/s. Sambhar Salts Ltd. is a subsidiary Co. which has taken over the business of the parent concern from 1. 10. 1965. It subsequently applied on 5. 1. 65 for the grant of registration certificate under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act with a specific prayer that the registration be granted from 1. 10. 1964. THE respondent granted the registration certificate under the Central Sales Tax Act with effect from 5. 1. 1965 and not from 1. 10. 1964 while the registered certificate under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act No. 664/47 was granted with effect from 1. 10. 1964. Further while granting the registration under the Central Sales Tax Act the Commercial Taxes Officer disallowed import of certain goods under C form without a requiring proper reason. This order of the Commercial Taxes Officer Jaipur has been assailed by the petitioners on these two grounds. The counsel for the petitioners contention with regard to the first ground was that according to law and facts the registration of petitioner's firm for purpose of Rajasthan Sales Tax as well as Central Sale Tax should have been done w. e. f. 1. 10. 1964 when the petitioner's firm commenced its business. There was no reason to refuse the Central Sales Tax registration with the back date. The reply given by the Advocate on behalf of the Commercial Taxes Officer was that no application was on the file. This reply of the counsel for the Commercial Taxes Officer was entirely misleading. The application dated 5. 1. 1965 was there in which specific prayer was made that the Registration under the Central Sales Tax Act should have been granted with the back date from 1. 10. 1964. Thus the order of the Commercial Taxes Officer in refusing this registration to the petitioners' firm under the Central Sales Tax Act with the back date from 1. 10. 1964 was devoid of reason and requires to be rectified. The second contention of the petitioner was that the respondent Commercial Taxes Officer unreasonably refused without assigning any reasons some of the items to be imported under sec. 83-B of the Central Sales Tax Act for manufacturing and processing purposes on C-forms. In support he cited the ruling of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Indian Copper Corporation Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Bihar reported in S. T. Cases 1965 Vol. XVI of page 259. The counsel on behalf of the commercial taxes officer however could not support the order of the Sales Tax Officer, disallowing certain goods to be imported at concessional rates of Central Sales Tax without assigning any reason. In the case cited by the counsel for the petitioner, their Lordships in the High Court came to the conclusion that certain goods such as locomotives and motor vehicles actually used for bringing the copper for ore from the mines and transporting it to the factory and the manufacturing finished products from the ore for sale were necessary in the process of manufacturing and processing of the goods of the assessee and therefore allowed these articles to be imported at concessional rates, while certain articles were refused as they were not found necessary. In this case the same test as referred to by their Lordships in the Supreme Court was not made applicable by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Jaipur to the respondent, with the result that he allowed some items to be imported on payment of concessional tax and others arbitrarily refused. He should have given specific reasons if any item was rejected to be imported on the ground that its import was not necessary for the purpose of manufacturing or transportation purposes as required by law. For these reasons this revision petition is accepted, the order of the Sales Tax Officer as far as refusing the back date registration of certificate under Central Sales Tax Act is modified and is directed now to relate back the registration application to 1. 10. 1964. He is further directed to review the list for import of certain articles in the light of my observations made above and pass explicit orders giving reasons for the same. .;