- (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE Petitioner before us is aggrieved by a notification issued by the Additional Commissioner, Department of Commercial Taxes, jharkhand, Ranchi, dated 31.12.2007, produced herewith as Annexure -3. According to this notification, facility of getting a consolidated registration for the purpose of the Rules, is to be given to those dealers, whose payable tax is more than rupees one crore. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner is aggrieved by this condition and he assails that this condition of "rupees one crore" payable tax is discriminatory and is beyond the scope of the legislative intent of the State, which has enacted Rule 3(x)(a) of the Jharkhand Value Added Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), whereby a provision has been made that those businessmen, who sells goods throughout the territory of the State and are having more than one place of business, then they can get a consolidated registration for the purposes of taxation. This is also being specified in Rule 3(x)(a) of the said Rules that such benefit would be provided only if the Commissioner or the officer, specially authorized in this behalf, thinks that doing so is necessary in the interest of revenue. Therefore, the very ambit of granting a consolidated registration was to be guided as per Rule 3(x)(a) of the said Rules, which is the principle consideration in the interest of revenue. Nothing further could be provided by a circular.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner emphasizes that the condition of payment of rupees one crore as tax is not such, which can be considered to have been envisaged as per the provisions of Rule 3(x)(a). According to him, it is in contradiction and in derogation of the Rules and therefore the same requires to be struck down and the application of the Petitioner for consolidated registration was required to be granted by the authority concerned.;