Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Addl. Commissioner Anti Evasion, ... vs Arihant Industries on 27 September, 2001
Equivalent citations: RLW2003(1)RAJ495, 2002(3)WLN248
Author: N.N. Mathur
Bench: N.N. Mathur
JUDGMENT Mathur, J.
1. This revision petition under Section 86 (2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1994' at the instance of Additional Commissioner, Anti Evasion, Commercial Taxes has been filed against the judgment dated 6.10.1998 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, whereby it has been held that the notification dt. 7.3.1994 exempting the women entrepreneurs in tiny sector covers all sort of levy of taxes including the purchase tax.
2. The facts giving rise to the instant revision petition are that the respondent assessee M/s. Arihant Industries, RIICO Industrial Area, Shivganj, submitted an application under Section 40 of the Act o 1994, stating that she is a woman entrepreneur in the tiny sector and is engaged in the manufacturing of edible oil. She purchased oil seeds for manufacture of edible oil from M/s Parihar Trading Company and other registered dealers of Sumerpur, who charged 2% tax on submitting ST 17 Forms. She claimed exemption from levy of tax on purchase of oil seeds under the notification of the Government dated 7.3.1994. It was pleaded that she is entitled to purchase, raw material i.e. oil seeds etc. from registered dealers without payment of any tax but selling dealers have refused to sell their raw material without payment of 2% tax. It was contended that this word 'tax' includes sales tax as well as purchase tax and charging of tax from purchaser by the seller on submission of ST 17 Form is against the spirit of the notification. Therefore, the following questions were referred for determination of the Additional Commissioner:
"1) Whether the tax charged by the seller on the purchases made by the appellant for manufacture of edible oil is correct or not?
2) Whether the Woman Entrepreneur as per aforesaid notification whereby the Government has exemption whereby the Government has exempted from tax, the seller is entitled to charge tax or not?
3) Whether the tax is payable or not in respect of the purchases made by the appellant being a Woman Entrepreneur and is exempt vide aforesaid notification?"
3. The Commercial Taxes Department took a stand that as per the notification, only the sales of the applicant are exempted from payment of tax and not purchases. On the other hand, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that notification dt. 7.3.1994 clearly exempts women entrepreneur in tiny sector from levy of tax, which includes levy of purchase tax. The reliance was placed on definition of 'tax' under Section 2 (41) of the Act of 1994 which means any tax or other levy by any name, livable under the provision of the Act. The Additional Commissioner having judged the spirit behind the notification from the speech of Hon'ble Chief Minister made in the Assembly to the effect that it was expedient to promote women entrepreneurs in tiny sector, sale of such.Units is exempted from payment of tax for a period of three years, held that the women entrepreneurs are exempted from sales tax only but a seller is entitled to charge tax on the purchase made by such Units under exemption. The Additional Commissioner on the same day passed the provisional assessment order for the Assessment Year 1997-98 under Section 27 of the Act of 1994 levying the purchase tax totalling to Rs. 1,65,381/- being 2% of the total purchase of 'Raida' worth Rs. 82,69,049/-. Aggrieved of the said order, the respondent assessee preferred the appeal before the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer. It was held by the Board that the term 'tax' is wide enough to cover all taxes inclusive of 'purchase tax' also under the notification dt. 7.3.1994 and, therefore, the respondent assessee was entitled to exemption of purchase tax also. Hence this revision petition by the Department.
4. The short point that falls for consideration is that whether the respondent assessee being a woman entrepreneur and small scale industrial Unit having obtained eligibility certificate for exemption from payment of tax during the impugned period is yet liable to pay purchase tax?
5. In order to appreciate the controversy raised, it would be convenient to acquaint with the notification dt. 7.3.1994 and the relevant provision of the Act of 1994. The Rajasthan Sales Tax Act has been enacted to provide for levy of tax on the 'sale' or the 'purchase' of goods in the State of Rajasthan. Section 2 is a dictionary provision. Section 2 (41) defines tax as follows:
"tax" means any tax or other levy by any name, leviable under the provisions of the Act."
6. Section 4 provides for levy of tax and its rate, which reads as follows:
"4. Levy of tax and its rate. - (1) Subject to the other-provisions of this . Act and the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (Central Act 74 of 1956), the tax payable by a dealer under this Act, shall be at single point in the series of sales by successive dealers, as may be prescribed and shallbe levied at such rates not exceeding fifty per cent on the taxable turnover, as may be notified by the State Government in the Official Gazette.
(2) Where any goods are sold packed in some material, whether charged for separately or not, notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), the tax liability of and the rate of tax on the packing material shall be according to the tax liability of and the rate of tax on the goods packed therein."
7. Section 11 provides for levy of purchase tax. Sub Section (1) of Section 11 reads as follows:
"11. Levy of purchase tax.- (1) Every dealer who in the course of his business purthases any goods other then exempted goods, in the circumstances in which no tax under Sections 4 and 12 is payable on the sale price of such goods, shall be liable to pay tax on the purchase price of such goods, shall be liable to pay tax on the purchase price of such goods at the same rate at which it would have been leviable on the sale price of such goods under Section 4 and 12."
8. Section 15 provides for exemption from tax, which reads as follows:
"15. Exemption of tax.- Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where the State Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest so to do, it may, by Notification in the Official Gazette, exempt fully or partially, whether prospectively or retrospectively from tax the sale or purchase of any goods or class of goods or any person or class, of persons, without any condition or with such condition as may be specified in the notification."
9. The Government of Rajasthan in exercise of powers conferred by Section 4 (2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, issued a Notification dated 7.3.1994 exempting the women entrepreneurs in tiny section from tax. The notification dt. 7.3.1994 is extracted as follows:
"F.4C8) FD/GR/IV/94-53 dated 7.3.1994 -
In exercise of powers conferred by Section 4 Sub-section 2 of R.S.T. Act, the State Govt. hereby exempts from tax Women Entrepreneurs in Tiny Section on the following conditions:
(i) That such exemption certificate shall be valid for a period of "3 years from the date of application;
(ii) That such Women Entrepreneurs shall apply to the Commercial Taxes Deptt. Rajasthan for such exemption, who being satisfied about the eligibility of such Woman Entrepreneur, shall issue an exemption certificate; &
(iii) That the benefit under this Notification shall be available to those units, which commences production after publication of this Notification.
Explanation "Tiny Sector" means an industrial unit defined as such by the Government of India from the to time."
10. Mr. Johari, learned counsel, has supported the contention of the Department by decisions of the Apex Court in Sun Oil Company (P) Ltd. v. State of West Bengal (1) and Kejriwal Electronics Private Limited & Co. v. Commercial Tax Officer (2).
11. I have read both the judgments carefully. In my view, they are distinguishable and do not advance the case of the Department. In Sun Oil Company (P) Ltd.'s case (supra), the question was whether the word 'tax' in Section 4-AA includes 'turnover tax' levied under Section 4-AA of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954. The Court on perusal of the Notification to the effect that tax shall not be payable by a dealer on the sale of notified commodity, held that it only referred to the tax on sale and not on the turnover tax. Similarly, in the case of Kejriwal Electronics Private Limited & Co.'s case (supra), the Notification itself used the words 'no tax shall be payable by the dealer under the said Act on Sales by a newly set up small scale industry'. Thus, the Notification did not include the turnover tax as in the case of Sun Oil Company (P) Ltd.'s case (supra).
12. In the instant case, words used in the Notification are 'exempts from tax.' Thus, on plain reading of Notification, clearly indicates that the women entrepreneurs in tiny section have been exempted from tax under the Act. The word 'Tax' has been defined in Section 2(r), which means tax leviable under the provisions of The Act. The sales tax is leviable under Section 4 and the purchases tax is leviable under Section 11 of the Act. Thus, the Notification which provides exemption, refers to all the taxes leviable under the Act which includes sales tax as well as purchase tax.
13. Mr, Johari, learned counsel for the Department, has laid much emphasis on the speech of Hon'ble the Chief Minister made in the Assembly while introducing the subject bill, which refers to word 'tax'. The relevant part of the speech is extracted as follows:-
181 gekjs ns'k ds vkfFkZd fodkl esa efgykvksa dh Hkkxhnkjh yxkrkj c<+ jgh gS vkSj os m|ksxksa esa Hkh vkus yxh gSA efgyk m/kfe;ksa dks fo'ks"k izksRlkgu nsus ds fy, muds }kjk LFkkfir u, VkbZuh ¼Tiny½ m|ksxksa es afufeZr oLrqvksa dh fcØh ij ruh o"kZ ds fy;s 'kr&izfr'kr dj dh NwV nsus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gSA blls efgykvksa esa vkRefo'okl o vkRe fuHkZjrk dks vkSj c<+kok feysxkA**
14. It is well settled that a speech made in the Parliament cannot be used to determine the true meaning and effect of the substantive provision of the statute. They cannot be used except for the limited purpose of understanding the background and the antecedent state of affairs leading up to the legislature. It is held by the Apex Court in State of West Bengal v. Union of India (3), that a statute, as passed by Parliament, is the expression of the collective intention of the legislature as a whole, and any statement made by an individual, albeit a Minister, of the intention and objects of the Act cannot be used to cut down the generality of the words used in the Statute.
15. Thus, on plain reading of the Notification dt. 7.3.1994 with the definition of the word 'tax' in Section 2(r), the only conclusion which can be arrived-at is that the word 'tax' includes sales tax as well as the purchase tax and charging of tax from the purchaser by the seller on submission of ST 17 Forms is contrary to the exemption notification referred-to above. Thus, the view taken by the Tax Tribunal is perfectly legal and justified and does not call for any interference.
16. Consequently, 1 find no merit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.