Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
M/S. KUMAR DISTRIBUTORS (P) LTD.BELTEK INDIA LTD.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT17/08/1995
BENCH:
VENKATASWAMI K. (J)
BENCH:
VENKATASWAMI K. (J)
VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)
CITATION:
1995 AIR 2475 1995 SCC (5) 593
1995 SCALE (4)780
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
K.VENKATASWAMI,J.
Leave granted.
A common question of law arises for consideration in
these two appeals. That question of law can be set out in
the following words:-
Whether an exemption notification published under
Section 7(3) of Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter
referred for short as the ‘Act’) will also cover exemption
from charge of additional tax levied under Section 6 of the
Act.
Brief facts are the following:-
The appellant in the first case was a dealer in
television sets, watches and mixers. The appellant in the
second case is a manufacturer of television sets in the
State of Bihar. The State Government with a view to
encourage industries in the State from time to time
announced various schemes granting incentives in the from of
exemption from sales tax or purchases tax as the case may
be. One such notification bearing No.S.O. 92 dated 18.1.88
was issued under the express provision of Section 7(3) of
the Act exempting from the levy of sales tax as well as
purchase tax on the sales of electronic raw materials to the
owner of electronic units approved and registered by the
Department of Industries, Government of Bihar or the
competent authority of Government of India for a period of 5
years w.e.f. 1.9.1986 subject to the conditions imposed
therein; and another notification bearing No.S.O.94 dated
18.1.1988 under the express provision of section 7(3) of the
Act granting exemption from the levy of sales tax on sales
of electronic goods manufactured by electronic industrial
unit approved and registered by the Department of
Industries, Government of Bihar or the competent authority
of Government of India for a period 5 years w.e.f. 1.9.1986
subject to the condition mentioned therein was issued.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
For the assessment year in question, namely, 1989-90,
the appellants claimed exemption from the levy of additional
tax payable under section 6 of the Act. The assessing
authority (Commercial Taxes Officer) refused to exempt
‘additional tax’ as claimed by the appellants. Aggrieved by
that, the appellants moved the High Court of Patna under
Articles 226/227 of the constitutions of India for grant of
necessary relief/appropriate relief. A Division Bench of the
Patna High Court after considering the scope and extent of
the notifications referred to above with reference to the
substantive provisions viz. Section 6 and 7 of the Act held
that the appellants are liable to pay additional tax and
they are not entitled to claim exemption from payment of
additional tax on the basis of exemption notifications
issued under Section 7(3) of the Act. Still aggrieved the
present appeals are filed in this Court.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted
that a look at the definition of ‘tax’ in Section 2(x) and
taxable turnover in Section 21 will go to show that the
exemption notifications issued under Section 7(3) will come
to the aid of the appellants to claim exemption from payment
of additional tax. Learned counsel placed reliance on two
judgments of this Courts reported in Deputy Commissioner of
Sales Tax Vs. Aysha Hosiery Factory (p) Ltd. etc. etc.,
(1992 Supp (2) SCC 178) and State of Karnataka Vs. Sungar
Brothers (1993 (3) SCC 16) to support his contention that
Sales tax will include additional tax. We can at once
dispose of this contention by stating that there is no
dispute that ‘tax’ includes additional tax in as much as
Section 2(x) of the Act is clear and unambiguous on this
issue.
But the question is whether the exemption notifications
issued specifically under Section 7(3) of the Act would
extend to exemption from payment of additional tax charged
under Section 6 of the Act when the provision for exemption
from payment of additional tax is made in Section 6(2).
For considering the issue on hand, it is necessary to
set out certain provisions in the Act. We will now set out
Section 2(x), Section 6, Section 7(3) and Section 21:-
"Section 2(x): "Tax" includes the sales or purchase tax
levied under section 3 as also additional tax levied under
Section 6 of this part.
Section 6: Charge of additional tax - Notwithstanding
anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 7 or
sections 11, 12, (13) and 21 or in any notification issued
thereunder every dealer having a gross turnover exceeding
the specified quantum as laid down in section 3 shall, with
effect from a date to be specified by the State Government
by a notification published in Official Gazette, pay an
additional tax at such rate, not exceeding two percentum of
his gross turnover (excluding the sales or purchase of goods
which have taken place either in the course of inter-State
trade or commerce, or outside the State, or in the course of
import of goods into, or export of goods out of the
territory of India) as the State Government may, from time
to time by notification in the Official Gazette, fix:
Provided that State Government may fix different rates
within the ceiling rate of 2 percentum on the gross turnover
of different goods:
Provided further that in the case of declared goods, as
defined in the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (Act LXXIV of
1956)-
(i)Where the tax payable under section 3 or section 4
equals the maximum amount of tax permissible under section
15 of the Act, no additional tax shall be payable under this
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
section:
(ii) Where the additional tax under this section
together with the tax payable under section 3 or section 4
would exceed the maximum amount of tax permissible under
section 15 of that Act, the additional tax shall stand
reduced to such amount as, together with the tax payable as
aforesaid, equals the said maximum amount.
(2) The State Government may by notification and
subject to such conditions and restrictions, as it may
impose exempt from the levy of additional tax gross turnover
in respect of any goods or class or description of goods.
Section 7. (1)*
(a)*
(b)*
(c)*
(2)*
(3) The State Government may, by notification and
subject to such conditions of restrictions as it may impose,
exempt from the sales tax or purchase tax-
(a) sales of any goods or class or description of
goods;
(b) sales of any goods or class or description of goods
to or by any class of dealers;
(c) any sale or category or description of sales; and
(d) purchase of any goods by any class of dealers or
any purchase or category or description of purchases of such
goods.
(4)
Section 21 Taxable turnover - (1) For the purpose of this
part the taxable turnover of a dealer shall be that part of
his gross turnover which remains after deduction therefrom-
(a) (i) in case of the work contract the amount of
labour and any other charges in the manner and to the
extents prescribed;
(a) (ii) sale price on account of sales exempted under
Section 7;
(b) amount of sales tax actually collected as such, if
any, along with the sale prices received or receivable in
respect of sales of goods;
(c) sale prices on account of sales to a registered
dealer other than a dealer liable to pay tax under sub-
section (8) of section 3 of goods mentioned in sub-section
(4) of section 11 specified in his registration certificate
as being required for re-sale by him inside Bihar or in
course of inter-State trade or commerce;
Provided that in the case of such sale a declaration in
the prescribed form duly filled up signed by the registered
dealer to whom the goods are sold or by his manager declared
under Section 15 is furnished in the prescribed manner by
the selling dealer;
(d) sale prices at the subsequent stages of sales such
goods as are specified by a notification issued under sub-
section (1) of Section 11 as being subject to tax at the
first point of sale in Bihar, if necessary evidence as
required by sub-section (2) of Section 11 are produced in
the prescribed manner before the prescribed authority.
(1A) Where any dealer claims that he is not liable to pay
tax on any part of his gross turnover in respect of any
goods by reason of transfer of such goods by him to any
other dealer or to his agent or principal, as the case may
be, for sale, the burden of proving this claim shall be on
the dealer and for this purpose along with other evidences
he shall furnish before the prescribed authority a
declaration in the forms and in the manner prescribed.
(2) Where any goods or sales exempted from the levy
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
of tax
by a notification issued by the State Government in this
behalf under sub-section (3) of Section 7 are purchased by a
dealer after furnishing a declaration as mentioned in or
provided by the notification or where any goods specified in
the certificate of registration of a dealers are purchased
by him after furnishing a declaration as provided in clause
(c) of sub-section (1) but are utilized by him for any
purpose other than those specified in such a notification or
specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1), as the case may
be, the sale price of the goods so purchased shall, without
prejudice to any action which is or may be taken under
Section 49, be deducted from the gross turnover of the
selling dealer but shall be included in the taxable turnover
of the purchasing dealer."
From a careful reading of Section 6, it would be
crystal clear that so far as charge of additional tax is
concerned, this section is self-contained not only for
charging additional tax but also for its exemption.
Therefore, the exemption notification specifically issued
under section 7(3) will not cover charge of additional tax
to enable the appellants to claim exemption from payment of
additional from payment of additional tax. Even though the
position is so clear, the learned counsel for the appellants
argued that in the light of Section 21, the turnover will be
nil and, therefore, there is no scope for charging
additional tax. This argument is based on a misconstruction
of Section 6 of the Act. We have pointed out that Section 6
is self-contained and there is an unbuilt provision for
exemption from levy of ‘additional tax’ therein, in addition
to Section 7(3) which provides for exemption from levy of
‘sales tax’ and ‘purchase tax’. The non obtain clause in
Section 6 also overrides Section 7(3) and Section 21
expressly. The position is, therefore, clear in this Act.
For the foregoing reasons, we find no substance in
these appeals and High Court was right in dismissing the
writ petitions. Accordingly these appeals are dismissed with
costs.