9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (2) TMI 460X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... une, 1985? Whether, by reason of the Notification No. 3320 dated March 9, 1978, amending the entry relating to the rate of tax in the earlier notification in that behalf by including bran therein, has the effect of bringing to an end the exemption from the levy of sales tax that bran enjoyed under Notification No. 14547 dated December 26, 1977? Held that:- The respondent would be liable to pay sal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, 1985. 3.. On December 26, 1977 the State Government issued a Notification (No. 14545) in exercise of the powers conferred by section 11(2) of the Bihar Sales Tax Fifth Ordinance, 1977, fixing the rate of sales tax on a variety of commodities which included, at serial No. 11, "atta, maida and sujji" at the rate of 3 per cent. On the same day the State Government issued another Notification (No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end the exemption from the levy of sales tax that bran enjoyed under Notification No. 14547 dated December 26, 1977. 5.. Our attention has been drawn to two judgments of this Court that squarely cover the issue in favour of the appellant-State. They are the judgments in Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P. v. Agra Belting Works [1987] 66 STC 1 and in Sales Tax Officer, Sector IX, Kanpur v. Darling Dairy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rate of 3 per cent specifically on bran intended, by necessary implication, to bring to an end the exemption that bran had therefore enjoyed. 7.. Notification No. 3320 has, however, been given retrospective effect from December 26, 1977. We find that difficult to uphold, having regard to the fact that this is delegated legislation. 8.. We, therefore, hold that the respondent would be liable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
